Skip to main content

Full text of "The Bibliotheca sacra"

See other formats 


Google 


This  is  a  digital  copy  of  a  book  that  was  preserved  for  generations  on  library  shelves  before  it  was  carefully  scanned  by  Google  as  part  of  a  project 

to  make  the  world's  books  discoverable  online. 

It  has  survived  long  enough  for  the  copyright  to  expire  and  the  book  to  enter  the  public  domain.  A  public  domain  book  is  one  that  was  never  subject 

to  copyright  or  whose  legal  copyright  term  has  expired.  Whether  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  may  vary  country  to  country.  Public  domain  books 

are  our  gateways  to  the  past,  representing  a  wealth  of  history,  culture  and  knowledge  that's  often  difficult  to  discover. 

Marks,  notations  and  other  maiginalia  present  in  the  original  volume  will  appear  in  this  file  -  a  reminder  of  this  book's  long  journey  from  the 

publisher  to  a  library  and  finally  to  you. 

Usage  guidelines 

Google  is  proud  to  partner  with  libraries  to  digitize  public  domain  materials  and  make  them  widely  accessible.  Public  domain  books  belong  to  the 
public  and  we  are  merely  their  custodians.  Nevertheless,  this  work  is  expensive,  so  in  order  to  keep  providing  tliis  resource,  we  liave  taken  steps  to 
prevent  abuse  by  commercial  parties,  including  placing  technical  restrictions  on  automated  querying. 
We  also  ask  that  you: 

+  Make  non-commercial  use  of  the  files  We  designed  Google  Book  Search  for  use  by  individuals,  and  we  request  that  you  use  these  files  for 
personal,  non-commercial  purposes. 

+  Refrain  fivm  automated  querying  Do  not  send  automated  queries  of  any  sort  to  Google's  system:  If  you  are  conducting  research  on  machine 
translation,  optical  character  recognition  or  other  areas  where  access  to  a  large  amount  of  text  is  helpful,  please  contact  us.  We  encourage  the 
use  of  public  domain  materials  for  these  purposes  and  may  be  able  to  help. 

+  Maintain  attributionTht  GoogXt  "watermark"  you  see  on  each  file  is  essential  for  in  forming  people  about  this  project  and  helping  them  find 
additional  materials  through  Google  Book  Search.  Please  do  not  remove  it. 

+  Keep  it  legal  Whatever  your  use,  remember  that  you  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  what  you  are  doing  is  legal.  Do  not  assume  that  just 
because  we  believe  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  the  United  States,  that  the  work  is  also  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  other 
countries.  Whether  a  book  is  still  in  copyright  varies  from  country  to  country,  and  we  can't  offer  guidance  on  whether  any  specific  use  of 
any  specific  book  is  allowed.  Please  do  not  assume  that  a  book's  appearance  in  Google  Book  Search  means  it  can  be  used  in  any  manner 
anywhere  in  the  world.  Copyright  infringement  liabili^  can  be  quite  severe. 

About  Google  Book  Search 

Google's  mission  is  to  organize  the  world's  information  and  to  make  it  universally  accessible  and  useful.   Google  Book  Search  helps  readers 
discover  the  world's  books  while  helping  authors  and  publishers  reach  new  audiences.  You  can  search  through  the  full  text  of  this  book  on  the  web 

at|http: //books  .google  .com/I 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


IXZ-ui^tL 


ANDOVCn-HARVARD    THEOLOQICAL    LIBRARV 
CAMBRIDOE,  M AtSACHU«ITT« 


diyGoot^lc 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


MBiGooi^le 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


BIBLIOTHECA    SACRA 

A  Religious  and  Sociological  Qwtrterly 


EDITOR 

G.  FREDERICK  WRIGHT 


ASSOCIATE  EDntHtS 

Eg  UHMAT,  OOABLU  r.  THVnitfl,  A.  A.  BISIX,  WILLUIC  >.  BAKTOIt 

HSHBT  A.  SnUBOH,  HXBSEBT  W.  IfAOOUN,  AZAKIAH  B.  BOOT 

ICELVnr  O.  KTIK,  W.  H.  OmFFITH  THOIUS 

gBOBOE  E.  HALL 


VOLUME  LXXVI 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA  COMPANY 
OBERLIN,  OHIO 

CHAKLBS  HIQHAM  ft  SON,  LONDON 

UU 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


CONTENTS  OF  VOLUME  LXXVI 


NO.  CCCI 

I.     "  DIE  HBILIGUNGSBErWEGUNQ '*   1 

rtOWtaWHt  BEHJAMUl  B.  WAKFIELD,  DJ>.,  LLJ>.,  UTTJ)., 

FBincKTon',  new  tebsbt. 

n.     THE  QREBK   GENESIS,   THE   QRAF-WBLLHAUaHN 

THEORY,  AND  THE  CONSERVATIVE  POSITION. .      41 

HABOLD   U.   WIEITES,    H^.,   LL^.,  lAITDOIT,    EKOLAND. 

UI.    THE  "  SPLIT  INTINITIVB  "  AND  OTHER  IDIOMS. .      61 

HriuirnT  WILLIAM   UASOITII,   PHJ>.,   OAKBBIDOE,   HABS. 

IV.  OBRMAN  MORAL  ABNORMALITT  84 

THE  BXVEBZNH  W.   H.  eBDTlTB  THDMAB,  DJ>., 

TOIOIITO,  OnXABIO. 

V.    CHRISTIAN    MONASTICISM    AND    ITS   PLACE    IN 

HISTORT  106 

Un   O.    SAHHAH,   T.S.A.,    (nDUH,   OHIO. 

VI.     CRITICAL.  NOTES   119 

Wbat  iB  a  DemocracyT    E.  C.  Oordon 119 

The    Theory    of    a.    Finite    and    Developing    Deity. 

Frank  Rugb  Foster  and  L.  Franklin  Qmber 125 

VII.    NOTICES  OF  RECENT  PUBLICATIONS 138 

Oardner's  Psychologr  and  Preaching,  133;  Thomaa'a 
Religion,  136;  Cope'B  Religions  Education  In  the 
Church,  137;  Crooker'a  The  Winning  of  Rellgloni 
Liberty,  137;  Barton's  The  Christian  Approach  to 
Islam,  139;  Monday  Club's  Sermons  on  the  Inter- 
national Sunday-School  Lessons  for  1919,  139;  At- 
kins's The  Qodward  Side  of  Life,  140;  Shannon'a 
The  Breath  In  the  Winds,  110;  Wltli  Ood  in  the 
War,  140;  The  Pulpit  In  War  Time,  141;  Enelow's 
The  War  apd  the  Bible,  141;  Anste/s  The  BlUe 
Viev  of  the  World,  141;  Wilson's  America — Here 
and  Over  There,  141;  Merrill's  Christian  Intema- 
tlonallBm,  141;  Drovn's  God's  Responsibility  for 
the  War,  141;  Bailey's  The  Outdoor  Story  Book, 
142. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


NO.  CCCII 
I.    THE  NEED  OF  A  NEW  CONCBPTION  OF  GOD 14S 

AKDBBW  SILLIES,  B00HE8TEB,  mW   TOKX. 

II.    SIN  IN  THE  LIGHT  OF  TO-DAT 16S 

insB  ouTK  M.  wmoHEsntB,  kampa,  ii»aho. 

III.     THE  GERMAN  ATTITUDE  TO  THE  BIBLE 166 


TOBOKM,  ONTAtlO. 

IV.    PRIEST  — PRIESTHOOD   176 

tHK   BKVBKEDU   WILLIAM    H.   BATES)  D.D., 

WASHHIOTOir,  D.   O.— ^BEBIXT,  OOLO. 

T.    CONTRIBUTIONS    TO    A    NEW    THEORY    OF   THE 

COMPOSITION   OF  THE    PENTATEUCH    (III.) 198 

HABOU)    M.    WIEREB,    U.A.,    LL.B.,    U>inH>I*,    EHOI^NI). 

VI.     JEHOVAH    821 

JOSEPH    D.    WlUOIf,    D.D.,   PBILADn^HU,    ^UTITBTLVANIA. 

VII.    CRITICAL   NOTES    228 

The  Hun  and  the  Imprecatorr  Paalms.   W.  A.  Jure).  228 
The  Text  of  Numbera  xil.  14  f.— Exodua  iv.  18,   Har- 
old M.  Wiener 232 

Navllle  OD  the  CompoeltloD  and  Sources  ot  GeneslB. 

John   Roaf  Wlghtman 231 

"  The  Studenf a  Theodore."    T.  Gola 243 

VIII.     NOTICES  OF  RECENT  PUBLICATIONS 2B0 

HopklQS'a  The  History  of  Rellglona,  250;  MUIs'a  Pre- 
historic R^lglon,  2G2;  Swete'a  Baa&ya  on  the  Early 
History  of  the  Church  and  the  Mlnlatry,  2G3;  Knud- 
Bon'B  Tha  Rellgloua  Teaching  of  the  Old  Teeta- 
ment,  267;  Morgan'a  The  Religion  and  Theology 
of  Paul,  261;  Snowden'a  The  Coming  of  the  Lord, 
262;  Camphell's  The  Second  Coming  ot  Chriat, 
262;  Hastlnga'a  Dictionary  of  the  Apostolic  Churdi, 
283;  Anthony's  The  Conscience  and  Concessions, 
26S;  Schenck'B  The  Apostles'  Creed  in  Uie  Tven- 
tletb  Century,  266;    Super's  Pan-Prussianlsm,  286. 


L    THE  VICTORIOUS  LIFE    (I.) 267 

THE   UKVEKKKU   W.   R.   OBimTIt  TEOXAS,   P.O., 

TOBomo,  oRTAam. 


jOOyGoOt^lC 


Contettts  y 

IL    THE    rmfDAHKNTAL    DIFFBRBNCBS    BBTWBEN 

PRB-  AND  POffr-MILLBNAHIANS 2S9 

raonsMffi  ium>  a.  kooixkabah,  pjt., 

pnfBBDBak,  pnriTBTLVAinA. 
UI.    THE   MISSION  OF  THE  CHURCH 113 

PBOIXBBOB  RXWTOIT  WIAE,   VMJ^tm,  IKItlARA. 

IT.    THE  BELIQION  OF  MOSES S28 

HAMXH   U.  VIXHEB,    H^.,   LL-B.,   LOIIDOM,  KKQUUTO. 

V.    CRITICAL  NOTES SG9 

The  CnUclsm  of  tlie  Gaal  Narrative  (Jud.  tx.  26-^1). 

Harold  M.  Wiener SS9 

A£ter  the  War— What* 861 

VI.    NOTICES  OF  RECENT  PUBUCATIONS 862 

Smith's  The  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  363;  Whlttaker'a 
The  Neo-PlatanlBU,  376;  Pullerton's  Prophecy  and 
Authority,  377;  Moore'a  History  of  Religions,  382; 
Keyser's  A  Syetem  of  Genera]  Ethics,  383;  WUkln- 
aon'fl  Concemlng  Jesui  Christ,  3S6:  Phelps's  Read- 
ing the  Bible,  3S6:  Lewis's  How  the  Bible  Grew, 
387;  Mackenna'B  The  Adventure  of  Life,  3S7;  Rob- 
ertson's The  New  Citizenship,  3S8;  Boreham'a  The 
Luggage  of  Life,  The  Silver  Shadow,  The  Golden 
Milestone,  Faees  lu  the  Fire,  Mushrooms  on  the 
Moor.  Mountains  In  the  Mist,  3SS;  Papazlaa's  The 
Tragedr  of  Armenia,  389;  Rankin's  Prayers  and 
ThanksglTlngs  for  a  Christian,  389;  Swing's  The 
Sunday-School  Century;  389;  More  from  the  Hunt- 
ington Palimpsest,  390. 

NO.  CCCIV 
L    THE  CREATIVE   DATS 891 

THE    BETEBEnO    I..    FaARKUH    GBUBEB,    OJ)., 

ST.  PAUL,  lOnRKSOTA. 

n.    THE  DIVINE  TRANSCENDENCE 415 

pBonasoB  DAVID  fosteb  istes,  d.d., 

HAinLTOK,  HEW  TOftK. 

III.  THE  PHILOSOPHY  OF  PROHIBI-nON 434 

CHAELEa   W.    BDPBB,   ATHENS,  OHIO. 

IV.  THE  VICTORIOUS  LIFE   (II.) 466 

THE  BEVEKBin  W.  B.   OBIinTH   THOUAB,   DJ>., 

PHILADEIfHIA,  PIHnaTLTAlTIA. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


vi  Contents 

V.    CRITICAL  NOTES    468 

Tbe  Bxodni  and  the  Conqueet  of  the  Negeh — Notes 
on  the  Bzodui— Tbe  Text  ot  Exodua  zvUl.  10  f. 
Harold  M.  Wiener 468 

VL    NOTICES  OF  RECENT  PUBLICATIONS 485 

cut's  The  Empire  of  the  Amorltee,  485;  Eeleer'B 
Selected  Temple  Documenta  of  the  Ur  Dynasty, 
4S7:  Qrtce'B  Records  from  Ur  and  I^rsa  Dated  in 
the  Larsa  Dmaaty,  487;  Grlce's  Chronology  of  the 
Larsa  Dynasty,  489;  Reiser's  Patesls  of  the  Ur 
Dynaat^r,  489;  Best's  The  Blind,  490:  Sanders's 
The  WashlQKton  Manuscript  of  the  Epistles  of 
Paul,  492;  Hayes's  Tbe  Synoptic  Gospels  and 
the  Book  of  Acts,  493:  Monday  Club's  Sermons 
on  the  International  Uniform  Sunday-School  Les- 
sons for  1920.  494;  Erdman's  The  Acts,  an  Ex- 
poslUon,  494;  Hill's  The  PropheU  in  the  Light  of 
To-day,  494;  QUUes's  The  IndlTtduallBtlc  Gospel, 
496;  Reu'B  Catechetlcs,  498;  Jobnaon'a  George  Wash- 
ington the  ChrlBtlan,  496;  Rhodes's  Our  Immortal- 
ity, 497;  Palmer's  Altruism,  497;  Batten's  Good 
and  EtII,  498:  Quayle'a  The  Dynamite  of  God, 
498;  Carey's  The  Kingdom  that  Must  be  Built, 
499;  Thwlng's  College  Gateway,  499;  Pentecost's 
Fitting  for  Palth,  499;  Robertaon's  Studies  in 
Mark's  Gospel,  600;  Zimmerman's  The  Person  of 
Christ  and  His  Presence  in  the  Lord's  Supper,  600; 
Dorcheater'a  Bolshevism  and  Social  Revolt,  501; 
Books  Received,  601. 


608 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Vol.  LXXVI  JANUARY,  1919 

BIBLIOTHECA 

Eighty-Ninth  Yea 

BDITOR 

G.  FREDERICK  WRIGl 

I  ABBOOUTID 

I 
JAUES  LINDSAY,  CHASLES  F.  THWING,  A.  A.  BEKLE,  WILUAM  E.  BABTON 

I  HENRV  A.  STIMSOK,  HERBEaT  W.   MAGOUN,  AZAKIAH  S.  lOOT 

HBLVIN  G.  KYLE,  W.  H.  GRIFFITH  THOlfAS 

GBOK^  E.  HALL 


"  Die  HEnJODTiosBEWKOUNG "             ...        Benfaniin  B.  Warfield  1 
The  Obxek  Gencsis,  the  QaAr-WBLLHATTsEn  Theory,  ahd  the  Conserva- 

TivK  Posmou Earold  M.  Wiener  41 

Thk  "  Split  Inrininvic  "  aitd  Otheb  Idious     .     Herbert  William  Magoun  61 

Gerkak  Mobal  Abnobiiauty                  .                 W.  H.  Orifflth  Thomat  84 

CuRiBTiAir  MoRASTiciBH  AND  ITS  Pucc  IN  HISTORY           Ian  0.  Hannah  105 
Ceitical  Notbs — 

What  Is  a  Democracy? E.  O.  QorOon  119 

The  Theory  of  a  FHnlte  and  Developing  Deit]' 

F.  H.  Foster  and  L.  F.  Oruter  126 

NoncKs    OF    Rbceht    Pubucatiohs 133 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA  COMPANY 

OBERUN,  OHIO,  U.  S.  A. 

EuBOFEAiT  Aqents,  Charles  Hioham  &  Soh 
2Ta  Faningdon  Street,  London,  E.  C 

•mOLC   NUMBER,  78   CENTS  YEARLY  SUBSCRIPTION,  ttM 

St  tlie  Post  OfDce  In  Oberlio,  Ohio,  as  Seeond-claM  Matter 

D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA 

A  Religious  and  Sociological  Quarterly 

EatabUsbed  In  1S44 


January,  1918 
The  Befonnatiou.    1517-1917.    Preserved  Smith 
The  Square  Deal — or  the  Oblong.    William  I.  Fletcher 
A  New  Solution  of  the  Peutateuchal  Problem  (I,),    Melvin  Grove  Kyle 
German  Critics  and  the  Hebrew  Bible.    T.  H.  IVeir 
Contributions  to  a  New  Theory  of  the  Composition  of  the  Penta- 

tench  (I.).    Harold  M.  Wiener 
The  Story  of  Gezer.    Wallace  N.  Steams 
The  Religious  Philosophy  of  Pascal.    James  Lindsay 
A  Worlcl-Uuity  C'oi»ferenfe,     Kajiuoml  L.  Bridgmau 
Critical  Notes  and  Notices  of  Recent  Publications 

April,  1918 
The  Christian  Attitude  toward  War.    John  EUiott  Wishart 
A  New  Solution  of  the  Pentatenchal  Problem  {II.).  Melvin  Grove  Kyle 
The  Bible  and  Literature.    Tiiomaa  Edward  Barr 

Contributions   to   a   New   Theory   of   the   Composition   of   the   Penta- 
teuch  (II.).    Harold  M.  Wiener 
The  Unity  of  Isaiah.    J.  J.  Lias 
Critical  Notes  and  Notices  of  Recent  Publications 

July,  1918 
The  Place  of  Force  in  Social  IJevelopment.    Philip  Stafford  Moxom 
Is  the  Sermon  on  the  Mount  Homiletically  Defensible?    Edward  Nor- 
man Harris 
Pan-Germanism ;  Its  Methods  and  Fruits.    Charles  W.  Super 
The  Divine  Immanence.     David  Poster  Estes  , 

The  Apocalypse  a  Drama.    George  F.  Herrick  i 

Catholic  and  Scientific.    John  Felix  I 

Critical  Notes  and  Notices  of  Recent  Publications 

October,  1918 
The  Theory  of  a  Finite  and  Developing  Deity  Examined.    L.  Prank 

Gruber 
The  Lord's  Prayer  in  a  Dozen  Langna^^.    Donald  B.  MacLane 
The  Exodus  in  the  Light  of  Archffiolojry.    A.  E.  Whathara 
"  The  Exodus  in  the  Light  of  Archajology."    Harold  M.  Wiener 
A  Theological  Reminiscence 
Basic  Pacts  for  Sociologists 
Critical  Notes,  Notices  of  Recent  Publications,  and  Index 

Any  Two  of  the  Above  Tfumberg  to  New  Subscribers  Bending 
$3.00  for  1919 

Bift^liotheca  Sacra  Company 

OBERLTN,  OHIO,  V.  8.  A. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA 


"DIE  HEILIGUNG8BEWEGUNO" 

PBOFESSOK  BENJAMIN  B,   WAHFIBLD,  D.D,,  LL.D.J  LITT.D, 
PaiNCBTON,  NEW  J 


A  OBiAT  religiooB  movement  has  been  going  on  in  Get^ 
man;  during  the  last  half-centnry,  to  which  the  attention 
of  the  oatside  world  has  been  far  too  little  directed.'  It  is 
commonly  spoken  of  as  "The  Fellowship  Movement";  and 
the  complex  of  phenomena  which  have  resulted  from  its 
activitieB  is  Bommed  up  briefly  as  "  Fellowship  Christian- 
ity." *  I'aul  Drews,  in  a  few  words  of  detailed  description, 
written  a  decade  ago,  brings  it  rather  clearly  before  ns  in 
its  external  manifestations.    He  says: — ' 

"  The  so-called  '  Fellowship-Movement.'  which  has  ex- 
isted now  about  a  generation,  is  a  religious  lay-movement, 
and  that  of  a  power  and  extension  such  as  the  Evangelical 
Church  has  not  seen  since  the  Reformation.  There  is  no 
German-Evangelical  National  church  into  which  it  has  not 
penetrated.  It  has  thrust  its  plow-share  even  into  the  hard 
soil  of  the  Mecklenburg  Church,  which  is  not  so  easy 
to  break  up.  .  .  .  Its  adherents  are  gathered  by  the  Fellow- 
ship from  the  circles  of  the  so-called  '  humble  people,'  *  — 
artisans,  craftsmen,  tradesmen,  railway  and  postal  em- 
ployees, waiters,  servant-girls,  here  and  there  (as  for  ex- 
ample in  Hesse)  even  peasants,  and  also  teachers.  Added 
to  these  there  are  —  as  will  not  surprise  those  who  are  ac- 
quainted with  Church  History  —  the  nobility  and  that  the- 
high  nobility.  The  academically  educated  and  the  indus- 
trial workers  alone  are  wanting.  Of  course  not  altogether;: 
but  they  form  exceptions  in  these  ranks,  and  do  not  af- 
fect the  character  of  the  whole.  .  .  .  The  Fellowship  is  ex- 
traordinarily thoroughly  and  compactly  oi^nized.  The 
particular  local  Fellowships  are  united  in  Provincial  asso- 
ciations, at  the  head  of  which  stand  '  Councils  of  Brothers  * 
(BrilderrateU  Over  these  associations  there  stands  the 
'  German  Association  for  Evangelical  Fellowship-work  and 
Vol.  LXXVl.    No.  SOL    1 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


2  Bibliotkeca  Sacra  [Jan. 

EvangelizatioD."  There  exist,  howerer,  Pellowship-cirdes 
which  have  not  connected  themselves  with  this  central  Asso- 
ciation. The  individual  associations  not  seldom  possess  their 
own  EBsembly-houses  which  are  sometimes  so  constmcted 
that  strangers  attending  the  meetings  can  find  lodging  or 
entertainment  in  them.  The  asBOciations  employ  also  their 
own  Professlonal-Workera,"  Bible-missionaries,  colporteurs, 
and  pay  them.  .  .  .  The  Professional- Workers  who  lead  the 
meetings  hare  either  received  no  special  training  or  have 
attended  one  of  the  educational  institutions  which  are  sup- 
ported by  the  '  Fellowship '  and  in  its  spirit.  Older  in- 
stances are  the  Ohrischona  (near  Basel)  and  Johauneum 
(first  at  Bonn,  now  at  Barmen)  institutions ;  latterly 
there  have  been  fonnded  the  Alliance  Bible-School  in  Ber- 
lin (founded  in  1905)  and  Pastor  Jeliinghaus's  Bible-school 
Seminary  at  Lichtenrade,  near  Berlin.  The  Institutional 
foundations  are  in  general  extraordinarily  developed.  The 
Institutions  serve  the  ends  partly  of  foreign,  partly  of  do- 
mestic missions.  We  find  hospitals,  inebriate-cures,  orphan- 
asylums,  rescue-homes,  sister-  [that  is,  deaconess-]  houses 
and  the  like.  They  have  Pensions  and  Hotels  of  their  own, 
carried  on  in  the  spirit  of  the  Fellowship  Christianity,  and, 
as  it  seems,  with  good  results.  Regular  annual  conferences 
(at  Onadau,  Blankenburg  in  Thuringla,  Frankfurt  on  the 
Main,  and  elsewhere)  draw  thousands  of  visitors.  There  is 
added  a  well-supported  press  serving,  in  part  general,  in 
part  local  needs  (e.g,  the  Allianzhlatt,  Auf  der  Warte,  Sab- 
hatklange,  Philadelphia,  Die  Wacht,  Das  Reich  Christi  and 
others).  Bookstores  of  their  own  distribute  literature  which 
is  read  in  their  circles,  among  which  there  are  many  trans- 
lations from  the  English,  of  course  exclusively  of  an  edi- 
fying character.  The  net  proceeds  are  devoted  to  '  the 
Kingdom  of  Ood,'  that  is  to  say  to  the  labors  and  pursuits 
of  the  Fellowship  Movement.  Surveying  all  this,  —  this 
strong  organization,  this  reaching  out  on  all  sides  —  we 
receive  an  impression  of  the  power  and  extension  of  this 
movement.  It  is  of  special  importance  that  property,  laud, 
buildings,  are  held.  Fixed  possessions  always  give  strength, 
guaranty  of  permanence;  are  the  back-bone  of  existence. 
If  our  national  churches  should  suddenly  disappear  from 
the  map,  the  world,  to  its  astonishment,  would  become  all 
at  once  aware  that  behind  the  protecting  walls  and  be- 
neath the  protecting  roof  of  our  national  cbnrchea,  a  new 
lay-church  of  a  kind  of  its  own  has  grown  up  which  is  well 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "  Die  Heiligungslfewegung "  3 

able  to  depend  on  its  own  walls  and  to  defy  the  etorms  of 
the  times."  ^ 

"What  we  are  looking  upon  in  the  Fellowship  Moreme&t 
is  the  formation  within  the  National  Churches  of  Oermany, 
bnt  not  of  them,  of  a  great  Oermau  free  church.  We  speak 
of  it  as  a  church,  because  it  is  a  church  in  everything  bnt 
the  name;  oi^anized  under  a  strong  and  effective  govern- 
ment, equipped  with  aU  the  instrumentalities  required  for 
the  prosecatioD  of  the  work  of  a  church,  and  zealously 
prosecuting  every  variety  of  Christian  labor  throughout  the 
whole  land.  ^Nevertheless,  it  vigorously  asserts  and  Jeal- 
ously maintains  its  right  of  existence  within  the  National 
Church,  or  rather  within  the  8evei;^l  National  Churches  of 
the  Empire.  All  the  members  of  the  several  constituent 
Fellowships  are  members  of  the  National  Churches  of  their 
several  localities,  (ulfllling  all  their  duties  and  claiming  all 
their  rights  as  such.  They  pay  all  their  dues  as  membere 
of  the  National  Churches;  they  are  baptized,  confirmed, 
married,  bnried  by  the  pastors  of  the  National  Churches; 
thc^  in  general  are  faithful  attendants  on  the  stated  ser- 
vices of  the  National  Churches  —  they  are  careful  not  to 
hold  any  of  their  own  special  meetings  during  the  hours 
of  the  regular  Sunday-morning  services  —  and  they  are 
ordinarily  among  the  most  earnest  supporters  of  all  the. 
religious  activities  of  the  National  Churches.  The  several 
Fellowships  are  organized  as  associations  of  members  of 
the  National  Churches  and  hold  their  property  under  laws 
which  give  them  this  ri^t  as  such.  The  adherents  of  the 
Fellowship  Movement,  in  a  word,  wish  to  be  understood 
to  be  just  members  of  the  National  Churches  who  have  or- 
ganized themselves  into  an  Association  for  prosecuting, 
under  the  laws  of  their  country,  ends  of  their  own — just 
as  other  members  of  the  National  Churches  organize  them- 
selves under  the  laws  of  the  land  for  prosecuting  ends  of 
their  own,  it  may  be  a  banking  business  or  the  manufacture 
of  potash.  Only,  the  particular  end  which  their  Fellowship 
has  in  view  is  the  prosecution  of  specifically  religious  work; 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


4  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

and  the  particular  religious  work  which  they  have  under- 
taken to  prosecute  is  just  the  whole  work  which  is  proper 
to  a  church.  In  other  words,  precisely  what  the  Fellowship 
Movement  has  undertaken  to  do  is  to  create  a  new  church 
Within  the  old  National  Churches,  a  veritable  ecclesia  in 
wcleaia,  or  to  put  it  sharply  from  its  own  point  of  view, 
a  true  and  living  Church  o*  God  within  the  dead  and  dry 
Bhell,  the  necessarily  dead  and  dry  shell,  of  the  National 
Churches  of  the  several  Qerman  states. 

Wliat  the  Fellowship  Movement  is  in  its  essence,  there- 
fore, is  a  revolt  from  the  very  idea  of  a  state  church, 
and  an  attempt  to  create  a  free  church  within  the  pro- 
tecting sheath  of  the  .  National  CbnrcheB  of  Germany. 
Martin  Schian  very  properly  sums  up  its  relation  to  the 
existing  churches,  accordingly,  in  the  formula :  "  External 
continuance  in  the  National  Church;  internal  rejection 
of  State-churchism." '  The  internal  rejection  of  state- 
churchism  is  complete.'  To  the  adherents  of  this  move- 
ment  it  seems  unendurable  that  the  Kingdom  of  God,  which, 
ite  Founder  declared,  is  not  of  this  world,  should  be  under 
the  dominion  of  the  secular  state,  and  should  be  exploited 
in  its  interests.  The  very  constitutive  principle  of  a  na- 
tional church  is  abhorrent  to  them  —  that  the  church  should 
Include  in  its  ample  embrace  the  whole  body  of  the  people 
as  such,  that  every  citizen  of  the  state  by  virtue  of  that  fact 
should  be  a  member  of  the  church,  with  a  right  to  all  its 
ordinances  and  participating  in  all  its  privileges.  They 
are  reproached,  therefore,  with  having  no  understanding 
of  the  value  of  a  truly  national  church,  of  the  service  it 
can  render  and  must  render  to  the  community,  of  the  bless- 
ing that  is  in  it  for  the  social  organism.  And  when  they 
declare  that  the  church  is  an  affair  of  religion  and  its  or- 
ganiftc  principle  must  be  religion  and  nothing  but  religion, 
tbey  are  twitted  with  the  impossibility  of  running  a  sharp 
line  ot  demarcation  between  tlie  religions  and  the  irre> 
ligious.  Just  because  religion  is  a  matter  of  the  inner  life, 
the  line  that  divides  the  two  classes  Is  an  Invisible  one,  and 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1010]  "  Die  Heiligungsbewegung "  5 

there  can  be  no  external  aeparatioD  of  the  one  from  the 
other;  nay,  "the  line  of  division  l>etween  God  and  the 
world  mns  through  every  Christian's  own  sonl."  How  can 
the  "  real  believers,"  "  the  truly  converted,"  be  distin- 
guished that  they  may  be  united  in  a  veritable  congregatio 
smtctorumt  Undeterred  by  such  criticisms  the  Fellowship 
people  have  gone  straight  on  organising  tbemselves  into 
their  eccleeia  in  eoclegia,  on  the  sole  principle  of  their 
"  decisive  Christianity,''  and,  doing  so,  have  become  a  great 
religious  power  in  the  land. 

They  draw  their  justification  for  doing  so  partly  from 
the  peremptory  demands  of  their  Christian  life,  partly  from 
the  precepts  and  example  of  the  heroes  of  the  faith.  "  Th^ 
appeal  to  Bengel,  Bpener,  Luther  himself.  In  his  "  Ger- 
man Mass,"  Luther  has  laid  on  the  consciences  of  his  foI> 
lowers  precisely  the  course  which  they  are  now  pursuing. 
He  had  bad  bis  experiences  and  was  under  no  illusions  as 
to  the  religious  condition  of  the  people  at  large.  He  would 
have  the  gospel  preached  to  them  all,  of  course;  but  he 
would  not  have  "  those  Christians  who  are  serious  in  their 
profession  "  content  tbemselves  with  so  sadly  mixed  a  fel- 
lowship. "  Let  those  who  earnestly  wish  to  be  Christiana 
and  confess  the  Gospel  with  band  and  lips,"  he  said,  "  en- 
roll tbemselves  by  name  and  gather  together  by  tbemselvea 
somewhere  or  other  in  a  house,  to  pray,  read,  baptize,  re> 
ceive  the  sacraments  and  to  perform  other  Christian  da- 
ties."  "  Even  were  such  sanction  lacking,  however,  some 
such  procedure  were  inevitable.  Companionship  is  a  hu- 
man need,  and  birds  of  a  feather  naturally  flock  together. 
Certainly  men  who  have  In  common  the  ineffable  experience 
of  redemption  through  the  blood  of  Christ  are  drawn  inev- 
itably together  by  the  irresistible  force  of  mutual  sympathy 
and  love.  They  belong  together  and  cannot  keep  apart. 
We  may  press,  without  any  fear  whatever  of  going  beyond 
the  mark,  every  possible  Implication  of  Paul's  great  declar- 
ation that  what  Ood  "  acquired  with  His  own  blood  "  was 
nothing  less  than  a  "  church."    There  is  imperious  church* 


'aqifzeaOvGoOt^lc 


6  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

building  power  in  the  blood  of  Christ,  experienced  as  re- 
demption. Even  tbe  flne  words  of  Bobert  Ellbel  '*  seem 
weak  here  —  that  "  a  converted  man  has  an  imperative  need 
of  communion  with  hiB  fellows,  that  is  with  people  who 
have  passed  through  or  are  passing  through  a  similar  inner 
moral  and  religious  process,  a  communion  with  brethren 
and  sisters  who  sustain,  cherish,  protect,  guard,  encourage 
and  gladden  him."  The  converted  man  has  not  only  the 
need  of  sncb  communion ;  he  is  driven  by  the  Spirit  into 
seeking  and  Anding  it.  We  cannot  think  then  tbe  move- 
ment towards  a  Fellowship  Christianity  other  than  both 
natural  and  necessary,  nor  can  we  fail  to  greet  it  as  a  man- 
ifestation of  life  and  health  in  the  Christianity  of  Germany. 
Accustomed  as  we  are  to  churcbes  organized  on  the  prin- 
ciple of  personal  confession  of  faith,  it  presents  to  out 
observation  nothing  which  seems  strange  except  its  anom- 
alous relation  to  the  National  Churches,  the  nearest  anal- 
ogy to  which  in  our  Anglo-Saxon  experience  is  probably 
the  position  of  the  early  Wesleyan  Societies  in  the  Church 
of  England."  Theodor  Jellinghaus,  having  in  mind  our 
British  and  American  Churches  organized  on  the  basis 
of  "  a  public  confession  of  faith  and  of  participation  in  the 
redemption  of  Christ,"  explains  the  situation  very  simply ; 
"  In  a  State  Church,"  says  be,"  "  in  which  all  are  already 
fully  legitimated  meml)er8,  subject  to  all  the  dues,  such  a 
practice  is  of  course  impossible.  Bat  ...  it  is  possible  that 
within  the  congregation  circles  should  be  formed  who  know 
that  for  positive  [entschieden^a)  Christianity  a  public  con- 
fession of  personal  acceptance  of  the  grace  of  Christ  is 
necessary,  and  who  seek  to  put  this  knowledge  into  prac- 
tice." That,  in  one  word,  is  the  sufflcient  justiflcation  of 
Fellowship  Christianity  in  principle. 

The  justification  of  the  Fellowship  Movement  which  is 
now  so  widely  spread  over  Glermany,  with  its  de6nite  his- 
torical origin  and  the  distinctive  character  impressed  upon 
it  by  this  historical  origin,  is  naturally  not  so  easily  man- 
aged.   This  movement  had  a  very  special  historical  origin 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "Die  HeUigtu^abewegung "  7 

by  which  a  peculiar  character  has  been  givea  it  vhich 
gravely  modifies  the  welcome  we  would  naturally  accord 
it  as  a  highly  snccessfnl  effort  to  draw  together  the  decid- 
edly Christian  elements  in  the  German  churches,  in  order 
that,  the  coals  being  brought  Into  contact,  the  fire  may 
bum.  The  story  is  already  partly  told  when  we  say  simply 
that  it  is  the  German  parallel  to  what  we  know  as  "  the 
Keswick  Movement "  in  English-speaking  lands.  That  it 
may  be  completely  told,  it  needs  to  be  added  that  it  has 
not  been  able  to  maintain  in  its  development  the  modera- 
tion which  has  characterized  the  Keswick  Movement:  that 
It  has  been  torn  with  factions,  invaded  by  fads,  and  now 
and  again  shaken  by  outbreaks  of  fanatical  extravagances. 
Like  the  Keswick  Movement,  it  derives  its  origin  from  im- 
pulses received  directly  from  Robert  PearsaU  Smith  in  "  the 
whirlwind  campaign  "  which  he  carried  on  in  1874-75  in 
the  interest  of  what  we  know  as  "  the  Higher  Christian 
Life."  The  Fellowship  Movement  has  therefore  from  the 
beginning  been  also  a  Holiness  Movement,  or,  as  they  call 
it  in  Germany,  a  "  Banctiflcation  Movement " ;  ^'  and  a 
Holiness  Movement  which  has  run  on  the  lines  of  the  teach- 
ing of  PearsaU  Smith.  The  platform  on  which  was  set  up 
its  great  representative  Conference  —  "  the  Gnadau  Con- 
ference," founded  in  1888  and  remaining  until  to-day 
the  center  of  its  public  life  —  embraced  just  these  two 
principles:  (1)  "Stronger  emphasis  on  the  doctrine  of 
Sanctiflcation '' ;  (2)  "Cooperation  of  the  laity  in  fellow- 
ship-work and  evangelization." "  What  the  Fellowship 
Movement  has  been  chiefiy  interested  in,  in  other  words, 
is  just  these  two  things  —  "  holiness  immediately  through 
faith,"  and  lay-activity  in  the  whole  sphere  of  Christian 
work,  here  distributed  into  its  two  divisions  of  the  work 
of  the  Fellowship,  which  includes  broadly  the  fostering  of 
the  Christian  life  among  professed  Christians,  and  evangel- 
ization. When  G.  F.  Arnold  wishes  to  sum  up  in  a  few 
words  the  sources  of  its  success,  he  naturally,  therefore, 
phrases  it  thus : "   "  Much  zeal,  much  labor,  much  money 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


8  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

bare  been  expended  on  the  Fellowship  Morement.  What 
makes  it.  Btrong  is,  formally,  tbe  voluDtarist  principle  and 
the  activity  of  the  laity;  materially,  the  idea  of  sanctifi- 
cation  by  faith  as  a  complement  to  jnstification  by  faith." 

Naturally,  Pearsall  Smith  did  not  create  this  movement 
out  of  nothing.  He  had  material  to  work  upon.  And  the 
material  he  worked  upon  was  provided  by  the  Pietistic 
Fellowships  which  go  back  ultimately  to  the  ecclesiola  in 
ecclesia  established  by  8pener  in  Frankfort,  with  the  pur- 
pose of  introducing  new  life  into  the  congregations.  These 
Fellowships,  working  in  more  or  less  complete  inde- 
pendence of  their  national  church -organizations,  had  in 
some  places,  as  for  example  in  Wflrttemberg  and  Minden- 
Eavensburg,  maintained  an  unbroken  existence  from  the 
period  of  Pietistic  ascendency.  Some  of  them,  especially 
in  the  South  and  Southwest,  had  preserved,  moreover,  tbeir 
peculiar  Pietistic  cliaracter;  others  were  more  "confes- 
flional " ;  while  others  still,  especially  on  the  lower  Rhine 
and  in  the  valley  of  the  Wupper,  already  exhibited  tenden- 
cies which  we  associate  with  the  Plymouth  Brethren.'* 
They  had  experienced  a  revival  of  religious  activi^  in  the 
twenties  and  thirties,  but  this  had  now  died  out.  Quick- 
ened into  new  life  by  the  impulse  received  from  Pearsall 
Smith,  they  supplied  tbe  mold  into  which  the  movement 
Inaugurated  by  him  ran.  This  was  their  contribution  to 
tbe  movement  They  gave  it  its  formal  character,  as  Ar- 
nold would  put  it:  they  determined  that  it  should  be  a 
Fellowship  Movement.  Its  material  character  was  im- 
pressed upon  it  by  Pearsall  Smith  in  the  very  same  act 
by  which  he  called  it  into  existence.  Under  the  impulse 
received  from  him  the  sense  of  uui^  of  spirit  among 
the  decided  Pietists  was  greatly  str^igtfaened,  a  zeal  for 
evangelisation  was  awakened  in  them,  and  a  new  doctrine 
of  sanctification  was  imprinted  upon  them  —  the  doctrine 
of  immediate  sanctification  through  faith  alone." 

Of  course  it  was  no  accident  that  it  was  precisely  on  the 
Pietistic  circles  that  Pearsall  Smith's  propaganda  took 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "  Die  Heiligungsbewegttng "  9 

effect;  nor  did  the  wbole  effect  wrought  by  it  proceed  from 
biB  own  personal  impulBe.  There  was  an  inner  affinity  be- 
tween tbe  ends  of  the  Pietistic  circles  and  those  that  Pear- 
saU  Smith  had  in  view,  which  laid  those  circles  pecnliarly 
open  to  his  appeal.  It  was  the  cultivation  of  Internal  piety 
to  which  they  addressed  themselves;  they  had  associated 
themselves  in  Pellowshipa  for  no  other  purpose  than  tbe 
qaickening  and  deepening  of  the  spiritnal  life  of  men  al- 
ready believers.  It  was  precisely  to  this,  their  own  chosen 
task,  that  Pearsall  Smith  summoned  them,  only  pointing 
out  to  them  what  he  conceived  to  be  a  Iretter  way  and  prom- 
ising them,  walking  in  it,  higher  achievements.  He  did  not 
address  himself  to  unbelievers,  seeking  to  bring  them  to 
Christ,  but  to  believers,  calling  tbem  to  a  fuller  salvation 
than  they  had  hitherto  enjoyed,  or  rather,  to  an  immediate 
"full  salvation."  Tbe  element  of  evangelisation  which  en- 
tered into  the  movement  from  tbe  first,  but  was,  naturally 
in  the  circumstances,  only  gradually  given  full  validity, 
was  contributed  to  it  neither  by  the  Fellowshipa  ••  nor  by 
Pearsall  Smith.**  It  came  from  without;  but  it  came  after 
a  fashion  which  made  it  a  preparation  for  Smith's  propa- 
ganda and  contributed  very  largely  to  its  success.  Smith's 
remarkable  agitation  in  the  interest  of  "  the  Higher  Life  " 
in  1874-76  in  England  was  embroidered  on  the  surface,  so 
to  speak,  of  Moody  and  Sankey's  great  revival  movement, 
and  owed  not  a  little  of  its  immense  effect  to  the  waves  of 
religions  awakening  set  in  motion  by  this  greater  and 
stronger  movement.  Those  waves  were  already  breaking 
on  the  Oerman  strand  when  Smith  arrived  there  in  the 
spring  of  1875  with  his  message  of  sanctificatlon  at  once 
by  faith  alone,  and  it  was  as  borne  upon  them  that  bis 
mission  there  was  accomplished."  The  somewhat  odd  re- 
sult foUowed  that  he  inaugurated  a  great  evangelisation 
movement  without  really  intending  to  do  bo:  be  had  it  In 
mind  only  to  bring  those  already  Christians  to  tbe  fuU  en- 
joyment of  their  salvation.  In  another  respect,  also,  the 
effect  of  his  propaganda  failed  to  correspond  precisely  with 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


10  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

his  intention.  He  came  proclaiming  himself  even  ostenta- 
tioQBly  the  member  of  no  church,  the  servant  of  all;  and 
desiring  to  bring  the  blessing  he  felt  himself  ciiai^ed  with 
the  dnty  of  communicating,  to  Ghrtetians  of  all  names  and 
connections  alike.**  The  movement  which  resulted  from 
his  impulse  has  been  rigidly  confined  to  adherents  of  the 
National  Churches  and  jealously  keeps  itself  "  within  the 
Church."  The  Methodists,  for  example,  who  were  at  first 
inclined  to  claim  him  as  their  own,"  —  as  they  had  consid- 
erable color  of  right  to  do  —  have  been  effectually  repelled 
and  have  learned  to  speak  of  the  movement  which  has 
grown  out  of  his  propaganda  with  complete  aloofness,  and 
even  a  certain  contempt*'  If,  however,  in  view  of  these 
circumstances,  we  are  tempted  to  donbt  whether  Smith 
contributed  to  the  movement  anything  more  than  his  doc- 
trine of  immediate  sanctiflcation  by  faith,  we  should  cor- 
rect ourselves  at  once  by  recalling  the  main  fact,  that  he 
contributed  the  movement  itself.  Precisely  what  he  did  was 
to  launch  in  the  German  churches  a  great  "  Higher  Life " 
movement.  It  belongs  to  the  accidents  of  the  situation  that 
this  Higher  Life  movement  took  form  as  a  great  Fellow- 
ship movement,  only  one  of  the  features  of  which  was  its 
Higher  Life  teaching  —  a  teaching  which  has,  after  a  half- 
centnry  of  saddening  experience,  happily  been  permitted, 
it  appears,  to  fall  into  the  background. 

There  are  few  more  dramatic  pages  in  the  history  of 
modem  Christianity  than  those  which  record  the  story  of 
the  prodigious  agitation  in  the  interest  of  "  the  Higher 
Life"  conducted  by  Pearsall  Smith  in  1874-75.  The  re- 
markable series  of  English  meetings  ran  op  with  the  most 
striking  effect  first  to  a  preliminary  and  then  to  a  final 
climax  in  the  two  great  "  international  conventions,"  at 
Oxford  in  the  first  week  of  September,  1874,  and  at  Brigh- 
ton in  the  first  week  of  June,  1875.  Their  permanent 
English  monument  is  what  we  know  as  "the  Keswick  Move> 
ment"  But  Smith's  ambition  extended  far  beyond  the 
conquest  of  England,  as  the  "  international  character " 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  '   "Die  Heitigungabewegung "  11 

which  he  gave  to  bis  principal  meetinga  testifies.*"  He  mis- 
calculated here  as  little  as  elsewhere.  The  CootineDtal 
gnestB  whom  he  invited  to  Oxford  and  Brixton  carried  the 
agitation  promptly  over  the  narrow  seas.  There  bad  been 
no  more  acceptable  speaker  at  Oxford  and  Brighton  than 
Theodore  Monod,  whose  American  training  and  experience 
qualified  him  to  address  an  English-speaking  audience  with 
ease  and  force;  and  on  his  return  to  France,  he  diligently 
exercised  his  office  of  Evangelist,  to  which  he  had  l>eea 
lately  ordained,  by  holding  meetings  in  th6  interest  of 
the  new  doctrine  of  immediate  sanctiflcation  by  faith  at 
Paris,  Nimes,  Montmeyran,  Montauban,  Marseilles,  and 
elsewhere.*'  Lion  Cachet "  became  the  Apostle  of  the  move- 
ment for  the  Low  Countries,  though  Holland  manifested 
little  of  the  desired  sympathy  with  it.  Theodor  Jellinghaua 
carried  the  good  news  from  the  Oxford  meeting  hack  to 
Germany,  and  a  year  or  so  later  Qustav  Wameck  added  to 
the  favorable  impression  already  made  by  his  moving  let- 
ters on  the  Brighton  Conference.**  "  The  hymns  used  at 
Oxford  were  translated  into  German  and  French,  and  also 
the  books  on  the  Life  of  Faith.  In  Paris  the  monthly 
periodical,  La  Liberateur,'"  and  another  at  Basel,  De» 
Christen  Olaubenaiceg,  were  at  once  commenced,  and  de- 
voted specially,  like  the  Christian's  Pathway  of  Power 
[Smith's  own  journal],  to  teaching  the  privileges  of  con- 
secration and  the  life  of  trust."  *' 

In  the  midst  of  this  diligently  conducted  general  cam- 
paign. Smith  himself  appeared  in  Germany,  and  that  with 
an  even  more  dramatic  effect  and  with  even  more  astonish- 
ing results  than  he  had  achieved  in  England.  He  was  not 
fetched  over  by  his  followers  to  clinch  their  initial  suc- 
ce«6es  and  advance  further  the  cause  for  which  they  had 
already  opened  the  way.*'  He  was  invited  to  Berlin  by  men 
of  the  highest  authority,  through  the  intervention  of  Court 
Preacher  Baur,  "  and  be  held  his  meetings  there  so  far 
under  imperial  sanction  that  the  Emperor  placed  the  old 
Qarrison  Charch  at  his  disposal.    He  was  in  Berlin  but  a 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


12  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

few  days  (from  March  31  to  April  5,  1875),  in  Qermany  at 
large  less  than  two  months.  He  could  speak  no  German, 
and  addressed  hia  audiences,  therefore,  only  through  an  in- 
terpreter. And  yet  he  ronaed  something  like  enthusiasm, 
and  left  behind  him  a  movement  stamped  with  hia  spiritual 
phyaiognomy  which  has  not  yet  spent  its  strength.  Jo- 
hannes Jilngst  suma  up  the  astonishing  facts  for  us  In  a 
few  straightforward  words." 

''His  appearance  filled  the  hall  of  the  Clubhouse  (Vereins- 
haut)  as  it  never  was  filled  before.  Hundreds  were  tnmed 
away  for  lack  of  room.  He  spoke  to  the  ministers ;  he  spoke 
to  the  laity.  Then  he  visited  other  cities,  where  his  appear- 
ance was  desired,  and  held  similar  meetings,  especially  at 
Basel,  Stuttgart,  Frankfurt  and  Elberf eld-Barmen.  There 
scarcely  ever  streamed  such  masses  of  people  to  religiona 
meetings  in  Germany  as  to  his.  Even  the  somewhat  dia* 
turbing  circumstance  that  he  speaks  nothing  but  English 
and  makes  use  of  an  Interpreter  aeemed  to  act  rather  as  an 
attraction  than  repellently." 

And  Hermann  Benser  draws  for  us  this  vignette,  that  we 
may  look  intimately  into  Smith's  mode  of  working  in  Ger- 
many : —  " 

"At  the  hoar  of  the  evening  service  on  the  first  day  of 
April  of  the  year  1875  a  singular  man  stood  in  the  pulpit 
of  the  Qarriaon  Church  in  Berlin,  Robert  Pearaall  Smith, 
He  was  preaching.  —  But  his  manner  of  speaking  was  wholly 
different  from  what  men  were  accustomed  to  hear.  He 
spoke  urgently  as  if  he  wished  to  clutch  his  hearers 
and  obtain  a  decision  from  them  at  once,  in  an  instant.  By 
hia  side  in  the  pulpit  there  stood  or  sat  men  who  inter- 
rupted the  discourse  with  prayers  and  songs.  Suddenly 
Smith  cried  out  in  the  Assembly, '  Bejoice,  rejoice  at  once! ' 
On  Sunday,  the  fourth  of  April,  he  gave  voice  to  the  entbn- 
siastic  aspiration : '  My  brethren,  I  expect  this  evening  great 
things  from  the  Lord.'  He  longed  for  the  return  of  the  Apos- 
tolic age.  As  the  disciples  of  Jesua  had  been  baptised  with 
the  Holy  Spirit  ten  days  after  the  Ascension,  so  he  looked 
for  the  Baptism  of  the  Spirit  on  the  tenth  day.  In  the  meet- 
ings everyone  who  felt  inwardly  moved  to  it,  led  in  prayer. 
Even  women  were  permitted  to  do  ao,  since  they  were  all 
brothers  and  sisters  with  eqnal  rights  before  the  Lord.— 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "  Die  Heiligunffabewegung "  1$ 

Had  the  golden  Apostolic  age  of  epiritual  pover  and  broth- 
erly love  retarned  in  Smith  ?  Many  entertained  this  hope. 
This  makes  it  intelligible  that  a  court-preacher  gave  Smith 
his  welcome  at  the  first  meeting,  and  many  pastors  spoke 
enraptured  words  as  if  under  the  compulnion  of  a  mighty 
Spirit,  Only  a  few  stood  aloof  in  donbt  and  warned  against 
desertion  of  the  firm  gronnd  of  Beformation  doctrine." 

Smith's  departure  did  not  allay  the  excitement  which 
had  been  awakened.  JQngst  describes  what  was  going  on 
nnder  his  eyes : —  *• 

"  The  number  of  Sanctificatiou  meetings  in  Germany  in- 
creases from  week  to  week.  We  cannot  describe  all  of  even 
the  greater  ones,  and  mention  only  those  in  Bern  under 
Inspector  Raypard  of  the  Cbriscbona,  in  Strassburg  nnder 
Pastor  Haas,  in  Geneva,  Freiburg,  Basel.  .  .  .  How  great 
the  movement  already  is  we  see  not  only  from  the  publica- 
tion by  the  ecclesiastical  journals  of  extra  sheets  on  the 
phenomenon,  but  from  the  establishment  by  the  friends  of 
the  movement  of  a  special  journal  for  advancing  the  work 
—  Des  Christen,  Olaubensweg  (Basel,  Spittler)"  —  which  is 
already  at  hand  in  the  second  impression." 
All  Germany  seemed  to  be  arouted,  and  Smith  had  done 
what  he  set  out  to  do.  He  went  to  Germany  under  thC' 
determination  to  conquer  it  to  the  Higher  Life  doctrine 
which  he  had  made  it  his  life-work  to  propagate;  and  he 
had  set  forces  at  work  which  seemed  to  him  to  bear  in  them 
the  promise  and  potency  of  victory.  The  spirit  in  which 
he  went  to  Germany  is  made  clear  to  us  in  an  incident  the 
memory  of  which  Jfingst  has  preserved  for  us : —  •' 

"  Before  Smith  went  to  Germany  he  was  again  for  a 
while  in  America.  There  he  visited  the  leading  personali- 
ties of  the  Albrecbt-brethren  in  Cleveland  and  described  to- 
them  especially  the  progress  of  the  movement  in  Germany 
{Chriatl.  Botachafter,  1875.  No.  7).  He  told  them  of  his 
purpose  to  go  to  Berlin  before  Easter  on  the  invitation  of 
inpOTtant  ministers  and  laymen,  and  said,  among  other 
tiiiiigs,  '  If  the  Lord  will  give  the  people  of  Berlin  into  my 
hand,  as  he  did  at  Oxford  '  —  but  corrected  himself  at  once: 
*  But  in  the  business  of  my  God  I  no  longer  know  any  if  — 
the  Lord  does  it  according  to  His  word.*  The  Botschafter 
ftdds:  '  He  believes  and  doubts  not.  With  remarkable  quiet- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc" 


14  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

ness  bat  equally  decisively  and  confidently  he  Bpeaks  of  the 
success  still  to  be  secured.' " 

The  state  of  mind  in  which  he  returned  from  Qermany  is 
startlingly  revealed  by  his  sudden  cry  one  day  on  the  plat- 
form at  Brighton,  "All  Europe  is  at  iny  feet!"  The  ex- 
citement which  he  had  aroused  in  Oermany  he  himself  evi- 
dently shared. 

Fortunately  the  movement  Inaugurated  in  this  atmos- 
phere of  excitement  fell  at  ouce  into  good  hands.  Men  of 
combined  zeal  and  moderation,  of  wide  experience  and 
trained  discretion,  like  Theodor  Ghnstlieb,  Jasper  von 
Oertzen,  Theodor  Jellingbaus,  took  charge  of  it.  The  Amer- 
ican Methodist  Evangelist  Fritz  von  SchlQmbach  was  em- 
ployed by  Chrlstlieb  in  pushing  the  work  of  evangelization 
in  northern  and  eastern  Germany,  and  then  by  Adolf 
StOcker  in  the  slums  of  Berlin.  The  organization  of  the 
movement  was  soon  taken  diligently  in  hand.  The  "  Ger- 
man Evangelization  Association  "  was  formed  in  1884.  The 
Gnadau  Conference  was  establisbed  in  1888,  and  out  of  it 
came  in  1890  the  "German  Committee  for  Evangelical 
FellowBhip-work,"  enlarged  in  its  scope  in  1894  into  "  The 
German  Committee  for  Evangelical  Fellowship-work  and 
Evangelization,"  and  transformed  for  legal  reasons  in  1901 
into  "  The  German  Philadelphia  Association."  Under  the 
leadership  first  of  von  Oertzen,  then  of  PQckler,  then  of 
Michielis,  thirty  years  passed  by  in  fruitful  development.** 
A  sister  alliance  had  in  the  meanwhile  grown  up  by  its  side 
(from  1886)  — of  eitremer  tendencies  and  more  deeply 
stained  with  Darbyite  conceptions  —  holding  its  great  con- 
ference at  Blankenbui^  in  Thuringia."  Between  it  and 
Gnadau  varying  relations  obtained  from  year  to  year.  The 
formation  of  a  third  nnion  was  attempted  in  1901-02  by 
Dr.  Lepsins,  the  brilliant  son  of  the  distinguished  Egyptol- 
ogist, when  rebuked  by  the  Blankeubnrg  Alliance,  of  which 
he  was  a  member,  for  some  foolish  dealings  with  the  Old 
Testament  text;  but  that  soon  became  only  an  annual  con- 
vention of  positive  theologians.    Meanwhile  the  Onadan 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "  Die  HeiligungaJtewegung "  IB 

ot^anization  flourished.  Very  direrae  elements  were  em- 
braced in  its  conatitDency ;  from  the  soft  Pietism  of  the 
South  and  Southwest  to  the  hareh  fanaticism  which  ruled 
the  temper  of  North  and  East.  Occasions  for  friction  were 
frequent.  Nevertheless,  in  the  absorption  of  the  Associa- 
elation  in  the  pressing  tasks  of  its  extension  and  organiza- 
tion, the  peace  was  fairly  well  kept  until  the  end  of  the 
century.  With  the  opening  of  the  twentieth  century,  how- 
ever, a  period  of  turmoil  and  inward  conflict  set  in  which 
has  shaken  the  movement  to  its  foundations  and  out  of 
which  it  has  found  its  way  only  as  through  blood. 

The  susceptibility  of  the  Fellowship  Movement  to  the 
worst  of  the  evils  which  have  torn  it  has  been  due  to  the 
circumstances  of  its  ori^  and  the  general  character  then 
impressed  upon  it.  It  was  the  product  of  an  impulse  re- 
ceived from  without,  a  prolongation  into  Germany  of  a 
movement  originating  in  conditions  prevalent  in  America 
after  the  Civil  War,  and  reaching  German;  as  the  exten- 
sion to  the  Continent  of  a  very  extravagant  English 
upheaval.  A  character  both  foreign  —  it  itself  would 
donbtless  prefer  that  we  should  say,  international  —  and 
enthusiastic,  in  the  worser  sense  of  that  term,  was  im- 
printed upon  it  by  that  circumstance  from  which  it  has 
never  escaped,  unless  indeed  it  has  at  the  end  escaped  from 
it  after  experiences  the  most  humiliating.  It  has  been 
always  conscious  of  standing  in  close  connection  with  the 
religious  forces  operating  in  Anglo-Saxon  Christendom, 
and  has  steadily  sought  to  reproduce  them  in  the  conditions 
of  German  life.  Priding  itself  upon  this  connection  and 
seeking  constantly  to  commend  its  teachings  and  methods 
on  the  ground  that  they  were  teachings  and  methods  which 
had  already  approved  themselves  in  Enf^and  and  America, 
it  has  had  no  just  ground  to  complain  of  the  reproach  of 
"  Englanderei  "  and  "  Methodtamua  "  *'  which  it  has  had  to 
bear.  Under  the  broad  term  "  Methodistical "  there  has 
been  included  a  multitude  of  sins,  the  worst  to  be  said  of 
which  is  that  the  Fellowship  Movement  has  reaUy  been 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


16  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

guilty  of  them  all.  For  unfortunately  it  has  ehovn  itself 
particularly  sensitive  to  the  repeated  waves  of  religioas 
excitement  which  have  Bwejit  over  Anglo-Saxon  Christen- 
dom and  has  reproduced  them  with  at  least  equal  extrava- 
gance. There  is  scarcely  any  fanatical  tendency  which  baM 
troubled  Anglo-Saxon  Christendom  during  the  last  half- 
century  of  which  the  German  Fellowships  have  not  been 
the  prey. 

The  movement  from  its  very  inception  was  a  Higher  Life 
moTNuent.  It  was  as  such  that  PearsaU  Smith  launched 
it:  and  it  has  made  its  assault  as  such  on  the  German 
Churches,  seelcing  with  constant  zeal  to  transform  their 
type  of  doctrine  to  this  model.  Fortunately  the  molding 
of  the  doctrinal  teaching  of  the  Fellowships  fell  from  the 
first  into  moderate  hands.  Theodor  Jellinghaus  became 
their  acknowledged  theologian,  and  he  gave  to  the  Higher 
Life  doctrine  aa  discreet  a  statemeut  as,  possibly,  it  has 
ever  received  or  is  capable  of  receiving  while  remaining  a 
Higher  Life  doctrine.  But  the  seeds  of  a  more  consequent 
Perfectionism  were  always  lying  just  under  the  surface 
ready  to  spring  up  and  bear  their  unhappy  harvest  in  aHy 
favorable  season.  PearsaU  Smith  bad  himself  sown  them. 
Did  he  not  tell  the  people  at  Brighton  that  W.  E.  Board- 
man  bad  "  never  broken  the  Sabbath  of  bis  soul "  through 
thirty  years,  and  did  he  not  permit  an  aged  minister  by 
his  side  to  assert  roundly  that  he  had  lived  for  thirty- 
five  years  as  purely  as  JesusT  **  The  seeds  of  a  consequent 
Perfectionism  are  sown,  indeed,  wherever  the  Higher  Life 
doctrine  is  preached,  and  must  produce  their  harvest  when- 
ever the  artificial  restraints  of  the  Higher  Life  discreet- 
ness are  relaxed.  The  harvest  was  reaped  in  the  Fellow- 
ship Movement  at  the  opening  of  the  twentieth  century, 
when  "  Pastor  "  Paul,  one  of  the  leaders  of  the  more  ex- 
travagant dements  of  It,  came  out  on  the  platform  of  the 
Onadau  Conference  itself  with  a  full-orbed  assertion  of  hU 
complete  holiness.** 

The  Fellowship  bad  never  constituted  a  homogeneous 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


191!)]  '■  Die  Heiligungsbewegung "  17 

body.  There  bad  always  been  eztraTagant  elementB  em- 
braced in  the  movement.  In  particular  the  vagaries  of 
Plymouth  Brethrenism  were  rife  in  large  sections  of  it. 
"Sot  only  has  the  great  Blankenburg  Alliance-Conference 
been  from  the  flret  deeply  imbned  with  this  tendency,  but 
also  large  sections  of  the  constituency  of  the  Qnadau  Con- 
ference itself.  The  chillasm  which  is  prevalent  throagh  the 
whole  movement  takes  in  these  circles  an  extreme  form,  and 
a  fanatical  temper  is  engendered  by  it  which  seems  capable 
of  everything  -except  sobriety.  Smith  himself  spoke  of  the 
possibility  of  the  restoration  of  the  Spiritoal  Gifts  of  the 
Apostolic  age;  even  Jelliughaus  was  not  free  from  this  de- 
lusion; it  was  from  the  beginning  an  dement  in  the  move- 
ment. The  Fellowships  had  not  recovered  from  the  turmoil 
roused  by  the  outbreak  of  consequent  Perfectionism  when 
they  received  a  staggering  blow  from  the  importation  in 
the  spring  of  1905  of  the  Welsh  Revival  with  more  than  the 
Welsh  excesses.  That  was  as  nothing,  however,  to  what 
befell  them  in  the  summer  of  1907,  when  the  so-called  Pen- 
tecost Movement  —  the  Los  Angeles  Revival  **  —  shook  them 
with  its  full  force.  "  Pastor "  Paul  of  course  was  found 
in  the  thick  of  it.  He  "  spoke  with  tongues  "  more  than  all 
others;  he  even  sang  "in  tongnes"  —  translating  favorite 
hymns  into  the  supernatural  speech ;  nay,  he  even  sub- 
jected "  the  tongues  "  to  philological  analysis  and  framed 
a  sort  of  syllabary  of  them.*' 

The  hnniiliatlng  performances  at  the  "  Pentecost "  meet- 
ings did  at  least  this  service  —  they  provoked  a  reaction. 
The  reaction  was  slow  in  coming:  it  was  not  until  1910  — 
after  three  years  of  these  disgraceful  proceedings  —  that 
the  Gnadau  people  found  strength  and  courage  to  repudiate 
them.  There  had  been  polemicizing  all  along;  but  the 
polemics  were  weak  and  ineffectual  because  conducted  from 
a  standpoint  not  essentially  different  from  that  of  the 
fanatics :  the  whole  Fellowship  Movement  was  possessed  by 
the  convictions  and  hopes  of  which  the  excesses  of  the  Pen- 
tecost Movement  were  only  the  legitimate  expression.  Time 
Vo!.  LXXVI.    No.  801.    2 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


18  BibHotheca  8acra  [Jan. 

was  required  for  the  revolution  of  conceptioD  which  could 
alone  bring  a  remedy.  It  was  a  blessing  that  time  enough 
was  taken  for  the  revolution  to  become  radical.  HermaoD 
Benser  gives  us  a  very  fair  account  of  what  happened. 
With  an  nnnecessary  bat  not  unintelligible  intrusion  of 
German  self-consciousness,  confusing  the  just  with  the 
German  and  the  bizarre  with  the  English,  he  tells  as  that 
it  had  always  been  the  desire  of  the  men  of  the  Gnadau 
Conference  to  keep  their  "  Philadelphia  Movement "  truly 
German  and  not  to  permit  it  to  become  English  —  when  he 
ought  to  have  said  that  they  wished  it  to  remain  soberly 
Christian  and  not  to  become  {or  remain)  fanatically  vis- 
ionary.   "  But,"  he  continues,** 

"  they  did  not  immediately  recognize  the  perils  of  the  re- 
vivals and  above  all  of  the  Pentecost  Movement.  For  there 
bnmed  in  their  hearts  too  a  longing  for  the  charismata  of 
the  Apostolic  age,  and  the  anticipation  that  Qod  would  per- 
haps grant  them  now  to  men.  Only  when  the  devastating 
effects  of  the  Pentecost  Movement  —  the  extravagance  of 
individuals  and  the  disruption  of  the  Fellowship  circles  — 
became  palpable,  did  the  men  of  Gnadau  obtain  clearness 
and  power  to  separate  themselves  sharply  from  this  kind 
of  thing.  At  the  Gnadau  Conference  at  Wernigerode  of 
this  year  [1910]  the  directory  of  the  '  German  Association 
for  Fellowship  Work  and  Evangelization'  unanimously  re- 
pelled the  Pentecost  Movement.  It  was  even  declared  that 
it  was  inconsistent  with  standing  in  the  Association  to 
have  any  fellowship  in  work  with  the  Pentecost  brethren. 
This  declaration  is  a  courageous  act  of  great  importance 
•  for  the  sound  development  of  Fellowship  Christianity.  For 
it  certainly  has  not  been  an  easy  thing  for  these  men  to 
renounce  brethren  with  whom  they  have  stood  in  close  re- 
lations of  love  and  esteem.  But  it  became  their  conscien- 
tious duty  to  place  walking  iu  the  fear  of  the  Lord  and 
bnilrling  up  the  congregations  in  peace  above  consideration 
for  these  brethren." 

By  this  action  of  the  Gnadau  Conference  of  1010  the  Pen- 
tecost Movement  was  not  suppressed.  It  continued  to  ex- 
ist ;  but  now  as  a  distinct  movement  of  its  own,  standing 
apart  from  the  general  Fellowship  Movement  and  forming 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "Die  HeUigungsbewegung "  19 

a  separate  sect  of  fanatical  character/^  But  the  import- 
ance to  ttie  Onadau  Movement  itself  of  its  act  of  excision 
was  not  orerestimated  bj  Benser,  writing  immediately  after 
the  event  In  it,  it  apparently  meant  definitively  to  turn 
its  back  not  only  on  the  Pentecost  Movement  and  its  hor- 
rible excesses,  but  on  all  in  its  own  history  which,  as  it  now 
saw,  led  up  to  such  things  and  was  distinguished  from  them 
only  in  degree.  In  effect  this  was  to  cease  to  be  distinct- 
ivel;  a  Higher  Life  Movement  and  to  place  itself  on  the 
basis  of  Beformation  Christianity.  Its  action  of  1910  was 
followed  up  on  January  24,  1911,  by  a  renewed  action  of 
the  directory,  confirming  it  and  even  sharpening  its  terms: 
and  joining  with  it  at  the  same  time  an  authoritative  re- 
jection of  "  Pastor  "  Paul's  crass  Perfectionism,  which  had 
already  met  with  the  disapproval  of  the  leaders  of  the  con- 
ference when  he  had  aired  it  at  the  meeting  of  1904.  This 
crass  I'erfectionism  had  now  become  only  an  element  in 
the  syntem  of  fanaticism  which  was  t>eing  exploited  by  the 
Pentecost  Movement.  The  singling  of  it  out  for  special 
condemnation  In  1911  has  significance,  therefore,  only  for 
the  direction  in  which  the  minds  of  the  Onadau  brethren 
were  moving.  The  two  things  were  already  conjoined  In 
some  most  significant  remarks  by  Elias  Schrenck  on  the 
Gnadan  platform  of  1910.  "The  children  of  God  of  to- 
day," he  said,  "  do  not  have  to  expect  a  Pentecost ;  we  have 
the  Holy  Spirit." 

"  Signs  and  wonders  are  not  in  and  of  themselves  a  proof 
of  the  Pentecost  endowment;  only  such  fruits  of  the  Spirit 
as,  according  to  Gal.  v.  22,  manifest  themselves  in  the  daily 
life  and  especially  in  our  sufferings  are  evidence  of  the  holy 
life  of  the  Spirit.  .  .  .  The  doctrines  of  the  '  pure  heart,'  of 
sinlessness,  have  come  to  us  from  America  and  England, 
and  have  obscured  the  Biblical  doctrines  of  sin  and  of 
jnstiflcatiob  by  faith  alone,  in  the  case  of  many.  We  have 
need  to  abase  onrselves  deeply  before  the  Lord  because  of 
the  errors  of  our  teaching  heretofore,  for  which  we  all  bear 
the  guilt.  We  must  cease  to  offer  salvation  to  our  people  - 
in  three  distinct  stages,  (1)  Forgiveness  of  sins,  (2)  Sanc- 
tification,  (3)  the  Baptism  of  the  Spirit" 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


20  Bibliotheoa  Sacra  [Jan. 

—  this  being  the  fonn  in  which  the  developed  Perfectionist 
doctrine  of  "  Pastor "  Paul  and  hia  coadjutors  was  pre- 
sented.*' "  This  trichotomy  is  thoroughly  un-Biblical,  and, 
praise  God,  also  thoroughly  uu-German."  There  is  a  healthy 
movement  of  repentance  manifested  here,  and  it  did  not 
cease  until,  as  we  have  already  hinted,  the  whole  Higher 
Life  element  in  the  teaching  of  the  Fellowship  Movement 
apparently  was  recanted,  —  a  recantation  in  which  Jel- 
linghaos  himself,  who  had  devoted  hia  life  to  its  propaga- 
tion, took  part/*  To  this  element  in  the  story  we  must 
return,  however,  more  fully  later.  What  it  is  important 
at  the  moment  to  make  plain  is  only  that  at  this  point  in 
its  development  the  Fellowship  Movement  has  apparently 
made  a  complete  volte  face.  So  clear  is  this  that  Theodor 
Sippell,  writing  in  1914,'°  is  inclined  to  look  at  its  whole 
history  theretofore  as  only  its  "  chaotic  beginnings,"  from 
which  no  safe  conclusions  can  be  drawn  as  to  its  future. 
"  It  cannot  be  denied,"  he  says,  "  that  a  provisional  stop- 
ping-point has  been  reached  in  the  internal  development  of 
this  movement.  The  new-Darbyism  and  fanatical  currents 
which  have  exerted  temporarily  a  prodigious  influence  have 
led  in  the  Pentecost  Movement  to  such  deplorable  aberra- 
tions, that  by  far  the  greater  number  of  the  German  Fel- 
lowships have  renounced  them  with  disgust."  Horrified  by 
the  realization  thus  forced  upon  them  of  what  they  have 
been  in  principle  involved  in,  tliey  are  raising  the  cry  with 
ever  greater  earnestness,  says  Sippell,  that  "  only  a  return 
to  Luther  and  the  heritage  of  the  Reformation  can  -save 
the  German  Fellowship  Movement  from  internal  and  ex- 
ternal collapse." 

It  will  no  donbt  be  interesting  to  look  a  little  more  in 
detail  at  the  Perfectionist  teaching  of  "  Pastor  "  Paul,  that 
we  may  observe  somewhat  more  closely  the  end-point  of 
the  development  of  the  Higher  Life  doctrine  of  the  Fellow- 
ships. The  discreet  Perfectionism  of  Pearsall  Smith,  and 
of  Jellinghaus,  who  followed  even  Smith  at  a  little  dis- 
tance, of  course  could  not  achieve  stabilil?.    In  the  nature 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "Die  He&igungabeicegung"  21 

of  the  case  it  passed  necessarily  by  its  own  intrinsic  logic 
into  conseqaent  Perfectiouism  whenever  it  met  with  a  tem- 
per accustomed  not  to  count  costs  but  to  reason  straight 
onward  without  reserves.  We  are  not  surprised  to  find  from 
a  hint  dropped  here  and  there,  therefore,  that  consequent 
Perfectionism  was  early  present  in  Fellowship  circles.  On 
one  occasion,  for  example,  Jellinghaua,  speaking  of  the 
fortunes,  in  Germany,  of  the  Higher  Life  Movement,  to  the 
propagation  of  which  he  had  given  his  life,  feels  constrained 
to  interject  a  warning  against  what  he  looks  apon  as  a 
danger  threatening  it.  "  Unfortunately,"  he  says,'^  —  he 
is  writing  in  1898— 

"false  anti-natural  asceticism  has  been  showing  itself  for 
a  few  years  back  in  certain  very  small  circles,  and  in  oth- 
ers an  un-Biblical  exaggeration  of  language  about  sancti- 
fication,  connected  with  a  distressing  censoriousness.  .  .  . 
After  having  for  twenty-three  years  taught  and  defended 
the  Biblically  circumspect  Salvationist  doctrine  of  sancti- 
fication,  along  with  my  beloved  friend  and  brother  Otto 
Stockmayer  in  Switzerland,  for  long  as  its  only  literary 
advocate  in  Germany,  I  can  do  no  less  than  warn  in  the 
most  earnest  and  serious  way  against  exaggerated  expres- 
sions concerning  the  stage  of  sanctification  attained,  which 
afterwards  cannot  be  confirmed  and  ratified  by  an  actually 
sanctified  life." 

We  do  not  know  that  "  Pastor  "  Paul  was  in  Jellinghaus's 
mind  when  be  wrote  these  words.  But  he  was  just  the  sort 
of  man  of  whom  what  Jellinghans  says  would  be  tme,*'  and 
we  are  told  that  he  had  been  speaking  freely  in  this  sense 
for  some  time  before  he  dramatically  cast  the  matter  into 
the  arena  of  public  debate  among  the  Fellowship  people 
by  his  astonishing  utterances  in  1904.'* 

The  essential  elements  of  the  doctrine  which  Paul  pro- 
claimed in  these  utterances  do  not  differ  from  those  of  the 
ordinary  Wesleyan  doctrine.  Like  the  Wesleyans,  he  sep- 
arated sharply  between  sanctification  and  justification,  and, 
like  them,  he  taught  an  immediate  sanctification  on  faith, 
an  immediate  sanctification  by  which  our  sinful  nature 
itself  is  eradicated.**    According  to  his  own  account  he 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


^  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

Tentured  one  day  just  to  take  Jesus  Christ  for  his  sancti- 
flcatioD,  and  he  at  once  received  it  —  in  its  fullness.  Thig 
is  the  way  he  describes  his  experience  in  his  journal  — 
Beiligung  —  for  April,  1904 : —  *' 

"All  my  previous  coDceptions  were  all  at  once  cast  into 
ruins  by  it ;  for  immediately  on  this  faith  in  my  new  Adam, 
I  saw  and  felt  myself  delivered  from  every  propensity 
(hang)  to  Bin.  Day  and  night  passed ;  days  and  nights 
passed ;  and  it  was  and  remained  in  me  all  new.  All  kinds  of 
trials  constantly  came  upon  me,  but  I  lived  in  blessed  new- 
ness of  life.  It  was  with  me  as  if  none  of  these  tilings  con- 
cerned me.  What  always  happened  to  me  was  that  I  lived  by 
the  two  words  and  the  truth  enclosed  in  them,  '  Jesus  only  * 
{Jesus  icird).  The  Savior  became  to  me  in  a  much  deeper 
way  than  ever  before  '  actual '  and  '  present.'  The  close- 
ness of  the  Father  filled  my  horizon ;  and  all  this  has  re- 
mained since  that  time  uninterruptedly  my  salvation.  No 
defilement,  whether  through  thoughts,  or  through  ebulli- 
tion of  temperament,  has  taken  place  with  me  since  then ; 
no  disturbing  thing  has  come  either  by  night  or  day  be- 
tween the  Lord  and  me.  I  live  in  the  blessed  fact  that 
Jesus  is  mv  new  Adam  from  whom  I  expect  and  may  ex- 
pect everything.  O  what  blessedness  lies  in  that!  I  was 
already  happy  in  my  Jesus.  Now  my  happiness  is  bound- 
less." ■• 

The  theme  upon  which  Paul  addressed  the  Gnadau  Con- 
ference at  its  meeting  at  the  ensuing  Whitsuntide  was  the 
appropriate  one  of  "  Our  Task  in  the  Kingdom  of  Christ 
is  Faith."  What  he  meant  by  this  was  to  assert  that  faith 
and  faith  alone  is  our  whole  part  in  salvation :  Christ  does 
all  the  rest.  We  have  only  to  believe;  nothing  else  is  asked 
of  us.  And  we  receive  whatever  we  have  faith  for :  accord- 
ing to  our  faith  it  is  done  unto  us.  Testimony  to  the  power 
of  faith  is  always  grateful  to  Christians.  The  energy  with 
which  Paul  testified  to  the  power  of  faith  met  of  course, 
as  it  always  does,  with  a  hearty  response.  But  when  he 
Ulustrated  his  meaning  by  declaring  that  from  those  who 
entrust  themselves  to  Jesus  for  full  redemption  He  takes 
away  at  once  all  indwelling  sin,  the  sinful  nature  itself;  the 
greater  part,  led  by  Director  Dietrich,  Inspector  Haarbeck, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1019]  "  Die  EeUigungsbetoegung "  23 

and  the  PreBldent  of  the  Conference,  drew  back.  In  his 
testimony  to  his  personal  »perience  he  abated  nothing  of 
what  he  had  already  declared  in  his  jonrnal.  He  had  taken 
Jesos  at  His  word.  Like  other  believers,  he  liad  received 
from  Him  through  faith  the  forgiveness  of  sins;  he  had 
day  by  day  been  cleansed  in  the  measure  in  which  he  had 
trusted;  at  last,  because  he  had  now  trusted  for  this,  he 
had  been  delivered  from  sin  itself  —  all  its  allurements  and 
impulses  were  gone  and  the  promise  of  Rom.  vi.  6  had 
been  fulfilled  to  him,  and  from  that  hour,  now  some  years 
back,  he  had  seen  nothing  of  his  old  Adam  —  to  which  In- 
spector Haarbeck  somewhat  drjly  rejoined  that  it  would 
perhaps  be  more  to  the  purpose  to  inquire  whether  other 
people  had  seen  nothing  of  him !  "  All  this  Paul  testified 
had  been  wrought  by  simple  faith.  He  had  not  sought  to 
sanctify  himself,  but  merely  to  let  himself  be  sanctified. 
He  had  turned  wholly  from  himself  and  only  believed  that 
the  Lord  had  delivered  him  wholly  and  from  all.  At  once 
bis  Ego  and  his  old  man  had  fallen  entirely  away,  and  sin 
now  no  longer  dwells  in  him," 

It  will  be  seen  that  Paul  leaves  nothing  unsaid  which 
would  make  the  completeness  of  his  deliverance  from  sin 
dear.'"  He  argues  that  if  Qod's  seed  is  in  the  sanctified, 
if  they  are  made  by  the  Spirit  partakers  in  the  divine  na- 
ture, then  they  no  longer  have  the  nature  of  sin,  they  are 
in  this  supereminent  sense  freed  from  sin.  It  cannot  be 
said,  indeed,  he  explains,  that  sin  no  longer  exists  for 
them ;  for,  though  it  no  longer  exists  in  them,  it  exists 
about  them.  They  are,  then^  subject  to  temptation ;  but  this 
temptation  does  not  arise  from  within  them  but  is  due 
solely  to  solicitations  from  without.*"  If  a  regenerate  man 
had  to  carry  his  inherited  evil  nature  about  with  him  he 
would  not  be  really  free;  he  would  be  impelled  to  sin  by 
his  sinful  nature.  And  if  sin  remains  entrenched  in  the 
nature-ground  of  the  saints  np  to  the  grave,  then  it  is  not 
Christ  bat  death  who  is  the  complete  deliverer;  and  if  sin 
is  wholly  destroyed  in  ns  only  at  the  resurrection  —  that 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


24  Bihliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

iSj  at  Christ's  Becond  coming  —  then,  in  spite  of  Bev.  xix. 
7;  1  These,  v.  23;  and  Eph.  v.  27,  the  soul  most  meet  its 
bridegroom  still  in  sin.'^ 

Nevertheless,  in  defending  his  doctrine,  Paul  exhibits  the 
usual  chariuess  in  the  employment  of  the  term  "sinless- 
ness  "  *'  to  describe  it.  He  wishes  to  distinguish  between 
the  n^ative  idea  of  freedom  from  sin  and  the  positire  idea 
of  incapacity  to  sin,  and  to  affirm  only  the  former.  He 
thinks  it  enough  to  saj  that  we  do  not  have  our  freedom 
from  indwelling  sin  from  ourselres,  but  only  from  Christ. 
The  regenerate  man  has  all  that  he  has  only  because  he 
abides  in  Jesus  and  Jesus  abides  in  him ;  the  ground  of  his 
freedom  from  sin  is  in  Jesus  and  not  in  himself  —  it  is  all 
of  grace  and  uot  of  nature  or  of  merit"*  We  could  talk 
of  "  Blulessness,"  he  says,  only  if  we  were  by  virtue  of  our 
own  nature  free  from  indwelling  sin  —  as  Christ  was,  and 
as  Adam  was  before  the  fall.  It  cannot  be  said  that  this 
rejection  of  the  term  "  sinlessness "  or  the  explanation  by 
which  it  is  justified,  makes  a  good  impression.  The  amount 
of  it  seems  to  be  that  Paul  wishes  to  leave  open  the  possi- 
bility of  bis  wholly  sanctified  Christians  sinning  again,  and, 
in  order  to  do  so,  plays  fast  and  loose  with  the  eradication 
of  their  sinful  natures.  If  their  sinful  natures  are  erad- 
icated they  no  longer  have  them,  and  if  they  no  longer  have 
them  —  how  do  they  differ  radically  from  Adam  before  the 
fall?  It  would  be  possible,  of  course,  to  say  that  the  erad- 
ication of  their  sinful  natures  does  not  infuse  into  them  , 
holy  natures;  tbey  have  lost  the  propensity  to  sin,  bnt  have 
not  gained  a  propensity  to  good.  But  that  does  not  seem 
to  be  Paul's  meaning:  he  claims  for  himself  apparently  a 
holy  nature:  the  eradication  of  his  sinful  nature  is  not 
conceived  In  this  sense  wholly  negatively  —  it  is  equivalent 
to  the  infusion  of  a  holy  nature,  even  Christ  himself.  Genn- 
rich,  therefore,  very  properly  remarks,  "*  that  "  if  by  the 
not-sinning  [the  n^ative  idea]  of  the  r^enerate  man  there 
is  meant  that  he  has  no  further  connection  with  sin,  be- 
cause sinning  is  for  him  something  contrary  to  his  nature 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1019]  "  Die  Seiligungabewegung "  25 

[as  regenerate],  and  is  therefore  no  longer  cODceivable  in 
his  case,  —  vby,  then,  precisely  what  is  afiBrmed  of  him  is 
sinlessness  [in  the  positive  sense]."  What  Paul  has  really 
arrived  at,  he  goes  on  to  say,  is  just  the  Wesleyan  doctrine 
of  Perfection,  vhich  is  repudiated  by  the  Sanctification 
Movement ;  and,  indeed,  Paul  himself  allows  "  that  for  him, 
as  for  Wesley,  the  real  point  is,  negatively,  purification 
from  all  indwelling  sin  and,  positively,  complete  living  to 
God  (perfect  love) .  Nor  does  Paul  escape  his  diflScnlties 
by  transferring  the  ground  of  our  freedom  from  sin  from 
ourselves  to  Christ.  This  is  to  confuse  the  cause  with  the 
effect.  Our  freedom  from  sin,  says  Paul,  follows  on  faith 
and  depends  on  abiding  in  Christ.  Let  it  be  granted.  What 
foUowR  on  faith  and  depends  on  abiding  in  Christ  is  our 
own  personal  freedom  from  sin,  from  indwelling  sin,  —  the 
eradication  of  the  sinful  nature.  It  is  easy  to  understand 
that  Paul  should  wish  to  validate  even  here  the  familiar 
"  moment  by  moment  deliverance "  which  he  had  learned 
from  the  Higher  Life  preachers.  But  Oennrich  very  prop- 
erly asks,  Can  he?  If  onr  sinful  nature  bae  been  eradi- 
cated, it  LB  no  longer  there.  And  the  reasoning  becomes 
irresistible :  "  If  it  belongs  to  the  nature  of  the  regenerate  no 
more  to  sin,  because  be  is  freed  even  from  the  last  remnant 
of  original  sin,  —  why,  then,  as  Heinatsch  rightly  remarks, 
there  is  no  need  for  the  r^enerate  to  have  progressive  puri- 
fication through  Christ's  blood  in  ever  renewed  surrender 
to  Him,  the  'moment  by  moment  deliverance.'  He  needs 
at  the  most  a  preservation  in  this  condition,  attained  once 
for  all  by  complete  purification,  to  (all  out  of  which  would 
be  possible  only  by  a  fall  as  radical  and  fundamental  as 
that  of  the  first  Adam."  ••  We  do  not  say  that  the  "  mo- 
ment by  moment  deliverance,"  dependent  on  a  "  moment  by 
moment  surrender,"  is  tenable  even  for  the  perfectionism 
of  mere  conduct  which  atone  the  Higher  Lite  people  wish  to 
validate^  For  how  is  a  lapse  in  faith  possible  to  one  whose 
sinleeeness  in  act  is  guaranteed  by  the  Christ  who  has  be- 
come the  source  of  all  his  life-activities?    But  it  becomes 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


26  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

doubly  absurd  vben  the  perfectionism  of  conduct  has  be- 
come a  perfectionism  of  nature.  The  plain  fact  is  that  we 
cannot  suspend  a  supernatural  salvation  on  natural  activi- 
ties whether  our  salvation  is  wrought  in  us  all  at  once  in 
its  completeness  or  in  a  long  process  ripening  to  the  end, 
—  if  it  is  wrought  by  Christ,  it  cannot  be  dependent  on  our 
"  moment  by  moment "  faith,  but  our  "  moment  by  mo- 
ment" faith  must  be  dependent  on  it.  We  cannot  teach 
both  a  supernatural  and  a  natural  salvation. 

As  was  natural,  a  large  part  of  the  debate  called  out  by 
"Pastor"  Paul's  consequent  Perfectionism  connects  itself 
with  its  relation  to  the  inconsequent  Perfectionism  of  mere 
conduct,  which  was  the  official  doctrine  of  the  Fellowship 
Movement.  It  was  contended  on  the  one  side,  as  for  ex- 
ample by  Heinatsch,"^  tbat  it  is  an  illegitimate  eztensioD 
of  tbe  idea  embodied  in  the  old  Sancti&cation  Movement. 
On  Paul's  part,  on  the  other  hand,  it  was  vigorously  as- 
serted that  it  is  only  the  old  Sanctiflcation  Movement  made 
explicit  in  its  necessary  contents.  In  this  debate  we  must 
pronounce  Paul  right.  Gennrich  is  quite  correct  when  he 
declares  "  that  "  in  point  of  fact  the  doctrines  of  deliver- 
ance from  indwelling  sin  and  of  the  baptism  of  the  Spirit," 
as  taught  by  "  Pastor "  Paul,  "  are  the  logical  extension 
of  the  ofBcial  doctrine  of  sanctification  of  the  Fellow- 
ship Movement,  —  as  the  advocates  of  them  ri^tly  con- 
tended at  the  Gnadftu  Conference.  ...  In  them,  for  the  first 
time,  Jellinghaus'  two  requirements  —  deeper  sanctifica- 
tion, greater  gifts  of  grace  —  are  really  met  for  lielievera 
thirsting  after  the  sensible  actuality  of  salvation."  These 
words  remind  us,  ho'wever,  that  the  debate  was  not  left  to 
run  its  course  on  the  simple  issue  of  consequent  or  incon- 
sequent Perfectionism.  The  question  of  the  "  gifts  of  grace  " 
was  soon  complicated  with  it  —  provided  for,  as  we  have 
already  had  occasion  to  note  incidentally,  by  a  third  stage 
in  the  saving  process  as  conceived  by  Paul  —  the  "  Bap- 
tism of  the  Bpirit,"  as  the  culminating  step  following  on 
complete  justification   and    complete  sanctification.     The 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "Die  HeiUgungsiewegung "  27 

Pentecost  MoTCment  broke  over  Germany  in  1907.  "  Pas- 
tor" Paul,  who  was  already  addressing  the  Gnadau  Con- 
ference in  1902  on  Faith  Healing,  became  at  once  one  of 
its  most  active  promoters.  The  upas  tree  was  now  in  full 
fruit.  It  is  not  strange  that  men  began  to  examine  with 
new  anxiety  into  its  rooting.  We  have  already  seen  the 
issue.  At  the  Gnadau  Conference  of  1910  the  Pentecost 
Movement  was  definitely  repelled  and  all  aBaociation  with 
it  was  forbidden  to  the  constituency  of  the  Qnadau  Confer- 
ence. With  it  much  of  the  consequent  Perfectionism  which 
had  been  troubling  the  Fellowships  since  1904  was  ex- 
claded.  But  the  officials  in  their  formal  action  of  January 
24,  1911,  went  a  step  further,  and  conjoined  a  defluite  con- 
demnation of  consequent  Perfectionism  with  tbeir  condem- 
nation of  the  Pentecost  Movement,  —  declaring  formally 
against  "  the  doctrine  that  by  faith  in  Christ  the  abolition 
of  the  sinful  nature  is  secured  or  that  the  believer  can 
attain  a  condition  on  earth  in  which  he  no  longer  needs 
justifying  grace."  •* 

The  end  was,  however,  not  even  yet  reached.  Could  the 
fruit  be  discarded  and  the  root  remain  in  honor?  It  had 
become  ever  increasingly  plain  to  ever  increasing  numbers 
that  the  "  clean  heart "  of  the  consequent  Perfectionists 
could  not  be  separated  from  the  "  clean  life "  of  the  Sanc- 
tiflcation  Movement,  and  the  one  rejected  and  the  other 
kept.  Among  others  it  had  become  plain  to  Jellinghaus 
himself,  who  had  now  for  a  whole  generation  been  the 
tmRted,  almost  the  oEQcial,  expounder  of  the  doctrine  of 
the  "clean  life"  for  the  Fellowship  circles.  Perhaps  we 
may  say  that  this  change  of  heart  had  long  been  preparing 
for  him.  He  had  felt  himself  reborn  to  a  new  life  through 
the  blessing  which  he  had  received  at  the  great  Oxford 
Meeting  in  1875,  and  had  given  himself  at  once  to  the  en- 
thusiastic advocacy  of  the  "  Salvationist  System  "  which 
was  preached  by  Pearsall  Smith.  Already  in  1880  he  pub- 
lished his  bulky  book  —  "  The  Complete,  Present  Salvation 
through  Christ,""  —  which  became  at  once  the  standard 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


28  Bibtiotheca  8acra  [Jan. 

Dogmatics  of  the  Fellowship  Christianity.  But  he  did  not 
reproduce  even  in  it  Smith's  systein  without  modification ; 
and  the  modification  was  in  the  direction  of  mitigation. 
Aa  edition  followed  edition,  —  in  1886,  1890,  1898,  1903,  — 
he  was  found  moying  ever,  slightly  but  steadily,  in  the  direc- 
tion of  further  mitigation.  Now,  however,  came  the  dduge. 
At  one  stroke  he  demolished  the  work  of  his  life  and  de- 
clared himself  to  have  been  running  on  a  wrong  scent." 
With  deep  pain  he  sees  now  in  "  the  Keswick  Movement," 
80  long  advocated  by  him,  the  Eonrce  of  all  the  evUa  which 
had  lately  befallen  Fellowship  Christianity  and  feels  him- 
self, because  of  his  advocacy  of  "  the  Keswick  Movement," 
personally  sharer  in  the  grave  responsibility  for  these  evils. 
A  certain  levity  lies  at  the  heart  of  "  the  Keswick  Move- 
ment " ;  its  zeal  is  to  assure  ourselves  that  we  are  actually 
and  fully  saved,  rather  than  to  give  ourselves  to  the  re- 
pentance which  is  due  to  our  sins,  to  the  working  out  of 
salvation  with  fear  and  trembling,  to  heavenly  mindeduess, 
and  a  life  of  prayer  and  a  walk  in  love.  It  imagines  that 
there  can  be  faltb  without  repentance  and  conquest  of  sin 
without  moral  stmg^e.  The  law,  sin  itself  as  evil  desire 
iu  the  regenerate,  the  determined  fulfillment  of  the  will  of 
God  in  vital  endeavor,  are  pushed  into  the  background.  It 
seeks,  in  a  word,  peace  Instead  of  righteouBness,  and  the 
trail  of  a  spiritual  euthymia  lies  over  it.^* 

But  Jellinghaus  did  not  spare  himself:  he  even  calls  his 
book,  which  appeared  in  1912,  by  the  directly  descriptive 
title  of  "Avowals  about  My  Doctrinal  Errors."  ^*  The  book 
naturally  created  a  sensation,  but  it  did  not  at  once  com- 
pose the  controvert-  Many,  of  course,  followed  Jelling- 
haus's  guidance  here  too,  as  they  had  followed  it  heretofore; 
and  the  cry  arose,  "  Back  to  the  Reformation."  Among 
these  were  the  chief  leaders  of  the  Onadan  Conference. 
Others,  however,  entered  the  lists  to  defend  Jdlingfaaos 
against  Jellinghaus,  and  only  sought  to  work  ont  from  the 
standpoint  of  the  Reformation  a  Justification  for  the  doc- 
trine of  full  presoit  sanctification  by  faith  alone.^*    What 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919}  "  Die  Heiligungsbewegung "  29 

ifi  most  noticeable,  wbat  is  most  hopeful,  in  the  debates  is 
that  there  is  a  retnm  on  all  handR  to  the  Beformation.  As 
the  curtain  of  the  Great  War  drops  on  QermaDy  and  shuts 
off  from  us  further  knowledge  of  the  development  of  the 
Fellowship  Movement,  we  are  cheered  to  see  the  promise 
that,  in  its  Onadan  branch  at  least,  it  may  have  definitely 
tamed  its  back  on  its  past  as  a  distinctively  Higher  Life 
Movement  and  grounded  its  future  ou  the  Beformation 
doctrine  of  salvation,  a  complete  and  full  salvation,  through 
faith  alone.  It  will  be  a  great  thing  for  the  future  of  Qer- 
man  Fellowship  Christianity  if,  in  the  welter  of  unwhole- 
some tendencies,  acting  and  reacting  upon  one  another  — 
the  semi-rationalism  of  Eisenach,  the  Darbyite  and  Chil- 
iastic  extravagance  of  Blankenbnrg,  the  wild  fanaticism 
of  the  Pentecost  people,  —  there  shall  be  one  center  of 
healthy  granulation  at  Gnadau. 


NOTES 


'  Paul  Flelsta  baa  gathered  the  material  from  the  sources,  sjtd 
written  the  hlstoiy  of  the  movement,  very  sympathetically.  In  bis 
Die  modeme  Gemelnschaftsbewegung  In  Deutschland,  Ist  ed.  1903, 
pp.  169;  2d  ed.  1906;  3d  ed.  1912,  pp.  60S.  published  as  Brster 
Band:  Die  Oeechtchte  der  Deutacben  Qemelnscbartsbeweguiig  bis 
zum  Auftreten  des  Zungeuredens  (1ST6-1907).  The  second  volume 
bas  not  yet  come  to  our  notice.  See  also  his  Die  gegenw&rtlge  Kri- 
slfl  In  der  modeme  Qemelnscbaftsbewegung  (1906,  pp.  48),  and  bis 
Die  Innere  Entwlcfeelung  der  Deutsche  Qemelnscbaftsbewegung  In 
der  Jabren  1906,  1907  (1908).  Also  his  Zur  Oescblcbte  der  Hellt- 
gungBbewegung.  Erster  Heft: Die  HelUgungsbewegung  von  Wesley 
bis  Boardman  (1910,  pp.  134).  Tbls  last  book  also  does  not  seem 
to  have  been  as  yet  completed.  It  Is  a  meritorious  work,  but  does 
not  rest  on  such  first-hand  Information  as  do  the  others.  On 
Flelsb's  standing  as  tbe  fundamental  historian  of  the  movement, 
see  Gelshorn  (Die  (nirlstllche  Welt,  1906,  col.  864)  and  Theodor 
SIppell  (/bid.,  1914,  col.  235).  Tor  the  underBtanding  of  tbe  Pel- 
lowsbips  In  general  and  their  Influence  on  tbe  Church  life  of 
Oermany,  consult  the  section  on  "  Die  Entfaltung  der  evangel- 
iscben  FrOmmlgkett  im  rellglSsen  Gemeinscbaftsleben,"  In  O. 
Ecke's  Die  evangeliscben  Landeaklrcben  Deutscblands  Im  neun- 
zebnten  Jabrbundert    (1904),  pp.  297-346. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


30  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

*Wltb  some  hesitation  we  employ  the  word  "Fellowship"  to 
repreMQt  the  Qerman  aemeimOuift*'  In  the  compoundB  O^mein- 
achafttbeweffung,  -cltrittenthum,  -kreite,  -Jeute,  -pflege,  and  the  like; 
and  that  carries  with  It  the  use  of  "  Fellowship  "  to  represent  the 
simple  noun  Oemeintchaft.  Kerr  Duncan  Macmlllan,  In  his  excel- 
lent brief  account  of  the  moTement  (Protestantism  In  Oermanr 
[1917],  pp.  24211.,  270),  uses  the  term  "Commuslt;  MoTement" 
Pranklln  Johnson,  deBcrlblng  It  from  the  report  in  the  Klrchllcbes 
Jahrbuch  for  1907  ("The  New  Evangelical  Movement  In  the  Ger- 
man Church,"  In  The  Kerlew  and  Expositor,  1910,  pp.  34S-3G6), 
calls  It  the  "Aaaoclatlons-Movement."  Both  of  these  seem  awkward; 
and  "  Conventicle  Movement,"  which  of  course  inevltahly  anggeets 
Itself,  also  appears  unacceptable.  We  need  a  word  which,  like  tb« 
German  OemelnKliaft,  Is  "  both  a  concrete  collective  and  a  (ab- 
stract) term  of  relation"  (C.  F.  Arnold,  Gcmelnschaft  der  Hell- 
Isen  und  HelltgungB-OemelnBchaften  [1909],  p.  4),  and  which  Is  free 
from  Inappropriate  associations  In  English.  We  are  encouraged  to 
adopt  "Fellowship"  by  Its  employment  by  the  competent  writer 
of  the  "  Foreign  Outlook  "  tn  the  Methodist  Review  (1911,  pp.  477- 
479:  "The  ' Fellowship  Movement*  In  German  Protestantism"). 

'  Die  Chrlstllche  Welt,  1908,  coll.  244-246. 

*Eleine  Leute. 

•Der  Deuttche  TerJ>and  far  EvangetUche  Oemelnichafttptteoe 
und  Evangelisation. 

'  BemfiaTbeiter. 

'  Cf.  the  vivid  account  of  how  much  in  evidence  the  Fellowship 
Movement  Is  In  Germany  which  Is  given  by  Blartln  Schlan  In  the 
opening  pages  of  bis  Die  modeme  Oemelnschaftsbewegung  (1909). 
In  almost  every  considerable  town  In  Germany  we  see  houses  of 
importance  bearing  the  Inscription  "  Fellowship  House  "  or  "  Chris- 
tian Fellowship  within  the  National  Church."  Thousands  of  Fel- 
lowship Christians  gather  every  summer  at  the  Conferences.  Great 
tents  are  set  up  In  the  summer  on  vacant  lots  In  cities  and  towns, 
whither  every  evening  through  four  weeks  hundreds  —  on  Sundays 
thousands  —  flock  for  popular  services.  Every  conceivable  kind 
of  subsidiary  organization  Is  employed  to  advance  the  cause.  "It 
is  no  longer,"  he  says.  "  a  thing  in  a  comer." 

*0p.  cit..  p.  22;  cf.  also  his  article  In  Die  ChrlsOlche  Welt,  1908, 
coll.  953  ft.,  and  the  remarks  of  Arthur  Bonus,  coll.  1064  tf. 

'What  Is  said  In  this  paragraph  is  said  by  Paul  Drews  and  Ar^ 
tbur  Bonus  In  the  articles  already  cited. 

"Of.,  for  this  paragraph,  H.  Jarck,  art  "  Gemelnschaftsbewe- 
gung,"  In  Herzog-Hauck,  Protest  Realencydopaedie,  vol.  xxllt. 
(1913)  p.  529. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "Die  Heiligungaheweffung "  31 

"Luther's  Werke  tOr  das  Cbristllche  Haus  (ed.  br  Buchwald 
et  aL),  vol.  Til.  p.  160;  cf.  K.  D.  Macmlllan,  op.  ctt..  p.  SO. 

"Quoted  b7  Jarck  (loc  cit.)  from  Kllhn,  Dm  ChrlBtllche  Qemeln- 
schsftswefien  (1897),  p.  IE. 

"  The  term  Oemeintchaft,  la  its  technical  use  to  describe  the  local 
Fellowship,  la  defined  by  Paul  Fleish,  the  chief  historian  of  the 
Movement  (Die  modeme  Oemelnscbaftsbewegung  In  Deutschland 
[2d  ed.],  p.  Z),  as  a  "voluntary  association  of  Christians  In  a 
given  locality  for  regular  meetings  for  the  purpose  of  mutual  edi- 
fication, apart  from  controlling  connection  with  the  ecclesiastical 
authorities  and  govemment."  That  would  do  fairly  well  as  a 
deOnltlon  of  the  early  Wesleyan  Socletlea  Sippell  (.loc  cit.,  col. 
102}  points  to  the  practice  of  the  Puritans  of  about  1600  aa  an 
earlier  example.  Having  spoken  of  the  Separatists,  he  continues: 
"Those  Puritans  who  remained  In  the  church  gave  out  the  watch- 
word — '  Not  separation  from  the  State  Church  but  union  of  the 
earnest  Christians  and  organization  of  them  Into  local  fellowships 
within'  the  external  frame  of  the  State  Church.'  These  were  fun- 
damentally local  FellowBhl[is  Independent  of  one  another  and 
■crlptnrally  organized,  which  were  looked  upon  as  the  true  Church 
of  Christ  This  new  Ideal  of  organization,  maintaining  externally 
connection  with  the  State  Church,  was  later  transplanted  by  Ame- 
alus  to  Holland  and  thence  deeply  Influenced  the  young  Pietism." 
On  this  showing,  the  modem  German  Fellowships  derive  straight 
from  the  English  Puritans  through  the  Intermediate  steps  of  the 
Reformed  Churches  of  the  Continent  and  the  Pietists. 

"Das  vSlllge,  gegenw&rtige  Hell  durcb  Christum  (4th  ed.  1898), 
p.  260. 

■*  Die  HeiUgungibewegunff. 

"Hermann  Benser,  Das  modeme  GemeinshaftBchristentum  (1910), 
p.  10,  and  art  "  Oemelnscbaftschrlstentum,"  In  Schiele  und  Zschar- 
nack.  Die  Religion,  usw.,  vol.  II.  col.  1263;  also  The  Hetbodlst  Re- 
view, 1911,  p.  477. 

"  Op.  cit.,  p.  33. 

"  Cf.  Jarck,  toe.  cit.,  p.  530. 

"Benser  (op.  cit.,  p.  S):  "The  movement  proceeding  from  Smltli 
brought  three  results.  It  strengtb^ied  among  the  decided  Pietists 
nnlty  in  tbe  Spirit:  It  pointed  to  evangelization  as  succor  for  tins 
unchurched  masses;  and  It  raised  the  banner  of  sanctlflcatlon  by 
faith  alone."    So  also  In  Schiele  und  Zscbamack,  op.  cit.,  col.  1263. 

'Jarck  (loc.  cit.,  p.  E29,  bottom)  can  speak,  for  example,  of 
"  Eivangellzatloa  of  tbe  unconverted  masses,"  "  In  contrast  with  tbe 
Fellowships  which  bring  the  converted  together." 

"Schlan  (op.  eft,  p.  S)  accordingly  contrasts  Smith  with  Finney 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


32  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

and  Moody  by  the  clrcumatance  that  "  hla  metbod  was  cbaracter- 
Ized  partially  by  bis  baring  In  view  less  tbe  awakening  ot  tbe 
unconverted  than  the  saacUflcatlon  of  the  already  converted."  Jo- 
hannes JQngst  (Amerlcanlscher  Hetbodlsmus,  usw.  [1876J,  p.  S4) 
telle  UB  that  he  often  began  hie  addresBes  by  explaining  that  he 
"  had  two  meBSRses,  the  one  for  the  imconTerted,  the  other  for  the 
children  of  Ood."  "  Nevertheless,"  be  adds,  "  the  awakening  Influ- 
ence on  the  unconverted  retired  somewhat  before  a  kind  of  Inner 
mission  for  believing  Christians,  whom  he  wished  to  urge  onward." 

"Cf.  P.  Kablenbeck,  Herzog-Hauck,  loc.  cit„  vol.  v.  p.  66S,  top: 
"  In  tbe  years  1873  to  187E  the  American  evangelist.  Moody,  and 
his  assistant,  Sankey,  preached  in  Great  Britain  and  Ireland  In 
surprisingly  successful  Revival  Meetings.  About  the  same  time 
with  the  news  of  thetr  results  there  came  another  revivalist- 
preacher  across  the  ocean  to  Germany,  Pearsall  Smith,  who  ad- 
dressed himself,  however,  more  to  those  who  were  already  believers, 
seeking  to  lead  them  to  complete  consecration  to  the  Lord,  and 
thus  to  BlnleseneBB." 

"  JQngst,  In  a  valuable  account  of  Smith's  work  In  Germany, 
which  Is  the  more  Instructive  because  absolutely  contemporaneous, 
puts  on  Smith's  lips  the  following  explanation  of  his  relations  to 
the  churches  (op.  cit.,  p.  87):  "I  belong  to  no  church  at  all.  I 
wish  to  serve  all  Churches,  to  call  In  all  of  them  the  unrepentant 
to  conversion,  the  converted  to  sanctlflcatlon,  not  to  loosen  but  to 
strengthen  the  bond  between  the  members  and  the  ministers  In 
the  several  Churches;  I  work  for  Christ  only  and  His  kingdom, 
and  am  far  removed  from  working  for  an  Individual  denomina- 
tion, and  must  wonder  that  people  In  Germany  will  not  at  once 
und^stand  my  complete  ecclesiastical  Impartiality."  Hemarkfng 
on  an  earlier  page  (p.  54)  that  "the  Methodists  are  obviously 
making  Smith's  aDalr  their  own,"  JUngst  recognizes  that  tbe  an- 
swer may  be  made  to  blm:  "  But  Smith  does  not  make  their  affair 
his,  and  that  makes  a  great  difference.  Ecclesiastically,  he  stands 
In  absolute  objectivity.  He  carries  this  so  far  in  Germany  that  he 
never  lodges  with  the  members  of  any  particular  church  fellowship, 
but  in  the  hotel.  In  order  to  give  offence  to  none,  whether  they 
belong  to  tbe  Evangelical  Church,  to  the  free  congregations,  or  to 
the  Methodists."  Jdngst  adds  that  this  behavior  Is  well  advised,  "  If 
the  movement  is  Intended  to  hold  open  the  hope  of  a  wide  exten- 
sion In  all  Christian  circles."  He  permits  himself  to  pass  Into 
conjectures  as  to  Its  possible  outcome,  which  are  very  interesting 
in  view  of  tbe  actual  event  Just  as  Methodism  ultimately  crye- 
talizcd  Into  a  new  denomination  (pp.  S8f.),  "the  possibility  Is  by 
no  means  excluded  that  the  Oxford  movement  too  may  be  segre- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "  Die  HeiUgungsiewegung "  33 

gated  and  conaolldated  by  an  energetic  and  conBtructlve  hand  Into 
a  new  ecelefilaBtlcal  communion,  fflnce,  bowever,  Smith  expreaflly 
oapbaBlxea  his  unvllllngneBB  to  eeire  taiy  existing  Church,  or  to 
form  a  new  commnnlon,  the  more  probable  result  will  be  that  la 
addition  to  a  rerival  and  wanning  up  of  the  several  churCheB,  the 
real  Ikults  of  the  movsnent  will  be  garnered  by  that  communion 
which  iB  most  cIobgIt  related  to  the  methods  and  the  teaching  of 
Smith.  This  Is,  howerer,  the  Hethodlste,  who  haTe  greeted  and 
accompanied  hla  appearance  with  loud  acclamatiocB.  Their  doe- 
trine,  in  eaaence  defended  -by  Smith,  could  In  0«rmanr  emergd 
from  the  small  Methodlstlc  circles  and  make  «li  Impression  on 
Bvangellcol  congTegatlons  on  a  large  scale,  only  If  on  the  one 
side  It  were  advocated  by  a  personality  as  consecrated  and  wens 
presented  in  a  clothing,  ecclesiastically  speaking,  as  colorless,  as 
tn  Smith's  Instance  Is  the  case." 

"JOngst  lop.  eit.)  gives  abundant  proof  of  this. 

"Observe  the  objectivity  with  which  It  ts  spoken  of,  for  example, 
la  The  Methodist  Review,  1911,  p.  477:  "If  Oermaa  churchmen 
took  with  some  misgivings  on  Methodism  and  other  '  sects '  In  the 
Fatherland,  they  show  a  far  deeper  anxiety  concerning  the  influ- 
ence of  the  Fellowship  Movement  (Oemeinwtuifttbewegung).  For 
ais  movement  alms  to  transform  the  type  of  doctrine  and  of  life 
within  the  church  Itself.  And  withal  it  Is  characterized,  at  least 
tn  some  places,  by  great  extravagances  and  generally  by  a  very 
narrow  outlook."    The  statements  In  this  extract  are  perfectly  true. 

"Already,  at  the  Oxford  Meeting,  public  Intimation  was  given 
by  him  of  his  purpose  to  "  carry  on  Ood's  work  on  the  Continent" 
(Account,  etc..  p.  281.) 

"Be  published  In  1874  his  book  on  the  new  doctrine,  De  Quol 
11  s-agltT 

*Cf.  his  book.  Hen  dagen  te  Brighton  (187G). 

'  Briefe  Qber  die  Tersammlung  In  Brighton  (1876).  For  esU- 
n&tes  of  this  book,  cf.  JelUn^aus,  op.  cit.,  p.  722,  and  Fr.  Wlnck- 
ler,  Roberi  Pearsall  Smith  and  der  Perfectlonlsmus  <191S),  p.  17. 
Cf.  R«lS-Hette,  Die  Oxford  Bewegung  und  Ihre  Bedeutung  fflr 
Bnsere  Zelt  (1876). 

■Bdlted  by  Theodore  Monod.  It  lived  only  from  1876  to  1879.. 
when  It  was  absorbed  Into  the  Bulletin  de  la  mission  Int^rienre. 

"Account  of  the  Union  Meeting  for  the  Promotion  of  Scripturat 
Htrilness  held  at  Oxford,  August  29  to  Sept  7,  1S74,  p.  338. 

"  Jeltlnghans,  In  the  Preface  to  the  first  edition  of  his  Das  vOl- 

Uge,  UKw.   (18S0),  says  explicitly:    "Against  our  expecutlon  and 

without  oar  seeking,  the  dear  R.  P.  Smith  was  Invited  to  Berlin^ 

and  (although  be  spoke  through  an  Interpreter  and  Is  In  any  evoit 

Vol  LXXn.    No.  301.    8 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


34  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

a  mftn  of  no  epectal  oratorical  gUt)  made,  by  tbe  power  of  the 
Holr  Spirit,  a  deep  impreulon  on  many  bundreda  of  eoula  audi 
as  I  suppose  no  one  ever  dtd  before  In  so  few  weeks." 

"  Scbion  (op.  cit,  p.  6)  puta  tbe  striking  paradox  of  tfainsa  tbna: 
"He  who  would  reckon  blmaelf  to  none  of  the  existing  cburcbea 
was  Invited  and  toasted  by  tbe  strictest  ecclesiastics  of  tbe  Oer- 
man  Churcb  "  —  and  tbe  moTement  be  founded  was  a  strictly  ua- 
eccleslastlcal  one. 

"  Op.  at.,  p.  S2. 

"  Op.  cit.,  p.  3. 

"  Op.  ctt.,  pp.  66,  67. 

"  JelllngbauB,  writing  In  1880,  says  its  circulation  was  then  atraut 
8.000. 

"  Op.  cit.,  pp.  84,  86. 

"  C.  F.  Arnold's  ctaaracterliatlon,  from  tbe  extremely  churchly  stand- 
point, runs  as  foUowB  {op.  cit.,  p.  SZ):  "In  the  Qnadau  branch  the 
Darbylte  undercurrent  was  held  down  for  a  long  time  by  the  Wflrt- 
tembergers,  and  up  to  von  Oertzen's  death  (18S4)  moderation  ruled. 
After  that,  however,  Graf  POckler,  supporied  by  Oraf  Bemstorf  and 
Pastor  Paul,  Introduced  a  driving  propaganda.  .  .  .  Therefore  tbe 
Oerman  Committee  for  BvangellcBl  Fellowship-work  and  Elrangel- 
isatlon  was  formed  In  1894.  In  1901  Graf  PQckler  sou^t  a  greater 
independence  for  the  Fellowship.  .  .  .  Since  1902  a  centrifugal 
movement  bas  no  doubt  made  Itself  noticeable;  but  an  orgsslzb- 
tion  bas  been  created  which  stretchea  from  Bast  Prussia  to  West- 
phalia and  from  Schleewlg-Eolsteln  to  Nassau." 

"C.  F.  Arnold  (op.  cit.,  p.  31)  describee  the  characteristics  of 
the  Blankenburg  branch  of  the  Fellowship  Movement  Anarchistic 
Darbylte  tendencies  rule.  Tbe  last  of  the  nine  articles  of  tbe 
Brangellcal  Alliance  wblcb  declares  tbe  preaching  office,  baptism, 
and  tbe  Lord's  Supper  permanent  eletUMits  In  tbe  Church,  Is  re- 
jected. The  State  Church  Is  asserted  to  give  to  the  Bmperor  what 
belongs  to  Ood.  Luther  sowed  to  the  flesh  when  be  founded  a 
State-Church.  All  theology  Is  worthless.  The  fondamental  doo- 
trine  Is  that  of  the  collection  of  the  Brlde<%urcb,  that  la,  extreme 
Cblllasm.  llie  leaders  are  von  Knobelsdorf,  von  Tlebohn,  Stock- 
mayer,  KOhn,  Rutianowltscb. 

"As  tbe  term  MetlujMtmiu  hss  been  flung  at  the  Fellowship 
Christianity  as  a  term  of  reproach.  It  bas  naturally  been  repelled, 
and  thus  a  debate  bas  grown  up  as  to  Its  applicability.  Jellln^aufl 
(op.  cit.,  pp.  78  0.)  protests  against  the  use  of  the  term  and  de- 
clares that  there  is  nothing,  strictly  speaking,  MethodlsUc  about 
the  movement  and  tbe  term  as  employed  of  it  Is  only  a  cloak  of 
Ignorance.    In  England,  be  says,  tbe  movement  Is  called  "  the  Ee^ 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "Die  HeiUgungsbewegung " 

wick  Morement ";  but,  as  that  term  would  conTer  no  t 
Gemum  ears,  be  propoaes  to  call  It  "the  SalT«tlonlat  IhetUttiuA) 
HoTement,"  because  wtaat  the  moTement  proclaims  la  aalTaUoa — 
the  poaa«8sloa  ot  salTBtlon,  the  assurance  of  salvation,  the  presoiC 
enjorment  of  salvation  —  through  JoTful  acceptance  of  the  Saviour, 
and  of  free,  complete,  and  presmt  salvation.  Jelllnghaus's  critics 
content  themselves  with  CTTlag  out  upon  the  linguistic  enormity 
of  the  term  heilittUcJi.  He,  however,  having  the  courage  of  his 
convictions,  goes  on  to  coin  a  corresponding  substantive  and  calls 
the  movement  (p.  1T6)  "our  new  Biblical  SalvaUonism  IHeiliM- 
miM)."  Frledrich  Simon  (Die  ChrlsUiche  Welt,  1908.  col.  IIU), 
white  denying  any  historical  ground  tor  calling  the  Fellowship 
Movement  "  Hethodlstic,"  yet  wishes  to  Uke  the  sting  out  of  the 
term  by  declaring  that  what  la  called  "  Methodlstic "  In  the  Fel- 
lowship Movement  was  already  recognized  by  Sctaleiermacher  a« 
natural  and  right,  and  that  whoever  would  deny  a  right  In  the 
National  Church  to  "  Methodlstlcally  colored  piety,"  In  even  the 
narrow  sense,  forgets  the  historical  nexus  between  Luther  and 
Spener  and  Zinzendorf  and  Wesley,  and  must  logically  turn  hia 
back  on  "missions,"  which  have  their  roots  In  Pietism  and  Morav* 
ianlsm.  and  strike  out  of  the  Hymn  Book  and  Liturgy  no  Incon- 
Blderable  amount  of '  their  contents. — In  point  of  fact,  of  eourse, 
"Methodism,"  In  its  narrow  sense  as  the  designation  ot  the  move- 
ment inaugurated  by  Wesley,  does  tie  in  the  background  Of  the 
mtlre  movsnent  Smith's  doctrine  of  the  Higher  Lite  la  histor- 
ically only  a  modification  of  the  Wesleyan  doctrine  of  "Christian 
Perfection,"  and  the  Eivangellstic  methods  employed  by  him  and 
conveyed  by  him  to  the  Fellowship  Movement  were  historically 
derived  jfrom  Methodist  practice.  Earl  Sell  (Zeltschrift  ffir  Theo- 
logle  und  Elrche  [1906],  vol.  xrl.  p.  375)  la  not  far  from  putting 
his  finger  on  the  exact  point  of  Importance  when  he  soya  that  the 
great  matter  In  which  Methodlam  dltfera  from  the  Pletiam  of 
which  the  Fellowship  Hovonent  Is  a  modification  under  the  Im- 
pulse ot  the  Bvangellzation  Movement,  lies  precisely  in  "  Metho- 
dlam'a  ardor  for  saving  souls,  and  that  quickly.  In:  a  moment"  The 
reality  and  the  strength  ot  the  Methodist  spirit  in  the  Fellowship 
Movement  Is  manifested  In  Ite  participation  In  this  Methodist 
"  suddenness  "  —  &ntth'B  famons  fetzt  —  "  Jeaua  aavea  me  now."  The 
two  most  outstanding  features  ot  the  movement  are  its  twin  insist' 
ence  on  sudden  conversion  and  sudden  sanctlflcaUon.  What  It  has 
stood  for  In  the  Christian  life  of  Qermany  is  salvation  at  once  on 
Eolth;  complete  salvation  at  once  on  faith;  complete  salvation  at 
tmee  without  any  delay  for  pr^aratlon  for  It  and  without  any  de- 
lay for  woiUng  It  out    Ereryt>ody  can  accept  salvation  at  once, 


joovGoot^lc 


86  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

aad  <it  once  on  accepting  It  can  poBseM  all  that  Ii  contained  In  It. 
This  la  reall7  the  underlying  Idea  that  gives  their  form  to  both 
WeBleyanlBm  and  the  Fellowship  MoTement  —  although  both  the 
one  and  the  other  brolce  Its  force  by  separating  JustlBcatlon  and 
sanctlflcatlon  from  one  another.  The?  wished  to  apply  the  epi- 
thets tnstantanea,  perfecta,  plena,  certa,  which  the  Old  Protestant- 
ism employed  of  the  supeirentlon  of  }UBtIflcatfon  on  fafth,  to 
sanctlflcatlon  also.  But  they  did  not  quite  like  to  take  the  whole 
plunge  and  make  every  Christian  absolutely  perfect  from  the  mo- 
ment of  believing.  They  both,  therefore,  were  driven  Into  Inconse- 
quent dealings  with  the  relation  of  Banctlflcatlon  to  Justification, 
and  with  the  contents  of  the  idea  of  sanctlBcatlon  Itself — deslgneit 
to  mltlgute  the  extremity  of  the  fundamental  principle  In  Its  appli- 
cation. Meanwhile  It  Is  clear  that  the  Fellowship  Movement  Is 
not  only  historically,  through  Smith,  a  daughter  of  Methodism  In 
the  narrow  sense  of  the  wwd;  but  that  it  shares  the  moat  fun- 
damental conceptions  of  Methodism,  and  from  them  gains  Its  own 
peculiarity. 

"So  JOngst  (op.  eft.,  p.  79)  tells  us. 

"  "  Pastor  "  Paul  was  eariler  pastor  at  RavoiBtetn  In  Pomeranlo, 
and  then,  as  a  leader  In  the  Gnadan  Conference,  organized  the 
Fellowship  Movement  In  Pomeranio.  He  was  very  prominent  In 
the  Pentecost  Movement  (1907);  and  making  Steglltz,  near  Berlin, 
his  home,  w«nt  out  thence  as  an  apostle  of  the  Pentecost  Move- 
ment, bearing  up  and  down  Germany  In  his  own  person  the  gifts 
of  grace. 

"This  is  not  the  place  to  describe  this  movement  In  detail.  It 
Is  treated  more  or  less  fully,  of  course.  In  all  accounts  of  the  Fel- 
.lowshlp  Movement  See  especially  Paul  Flelsh,  Die  Innero  Ent- 
wickelung,  ubw.  See  also  E.  Bdel,  Die  Pflngatbewegung  Im  Uchte 
der  klrchllche  Qeschichte  (Brieg,  B.  Captuller  [1910]  pp.  122); 
B.  Kdhn,  Die  Pflngstbewegung  Im  Llcbte  der  Belllgen  Schrltt  und 
Ihrer  elgnen  Oeschlchte  (Ootha,  Olt  [1913?]  pp.  106).  The  matter 
Is  excellently  treated  by  Paul  Drews  In  Die  Chrlstllcbe  Welt,  1908, 
eolL  2710.,  290  S.,  who  cites  the  most  Important  primary  German 
Uteratun;  B.  Buchner's  article  In  Die  ChrlsUlche  Welt  (1911.  coll. 
29  ft.)  gives  personal  experiences  with  the  German  phenomena. 
F.  G.  Henke  (The  American  Journal  of  Theology,  1909,  pp.  193  ft.) 
gives  some  account  of  the  non-German  history,  with  references  to 
ttie  primary  Uteratun.  See  also  the  literature  mentioned  In  H. 
Bavlnck,  Oereformeerde  Dogmatiek  (id  ed.),  voL  III.  p.  668,  note. 

"Scblan  (op.  cit.,  p.  16)  relates  what  "Pastor"  Paul  did  with 
"  the  tongues."  "A  special  curlosltr  In  the  region  of  speaking  with 
tongues  Is  described  by  Pastor  Paul,  who  has  In  his  own  UUI» 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "  Die  Heiligungsbetcegung "  37 

monthly  masaxlne  rsiKirted  with  stenoBraphlc  exactneM  big  ex- 
perlencM  In  this  Hold.  He  hu  not  only  Bi>okai  with  tonKuea,  but 
Klao  —  think  of  It!  In  meaningless  ayllables  which  he  could  not 
blmself  Interpret!  ~  bas  snng  tbem  hours  at  a  time.  Afterwards 
be  himself  subjected  bis  own  tongues  ipeeehes  to  careful  InvesU- 
gatlon,  and  sought  to  translate  them,  and  then  endearored  even  to 
sing  some  well^nown  rdldous  strngB  'In  tongues.'  'Every  song, 
whose  melody  vaa  wdl  enoo^  known  to  me,  I  coitld  sing  In 
tongues,  and  all  of  tbem  eTsry  time  rhymed  wonderfully.'  When 
they  rhymed  thus:  'ea  tscbn  ra  ta— u  ra  torida^tschu  rl  kanka — 
oil  tanka,'  be  rejoiced.  "There  Is  more  rhyme  In  it  than  in  the 
Oenuan  words,'  be  said." 

"Op.  tit.,  pp.  13,  14. 

«  Cf.  The  Methodist  Rerlew,  ISll,  p.  478. 

"Cf.  SlppeU  (IOC.  df.,  col.  178),  who,  pointing  out  that  Hetho- 
dlam  has  always  been  liable  to  fanaticism,  adds:  "A  sad  instance 
•f  this  is  our  prea«>t-day  Praitecoat  Movement,  which,  earrying 
the  doctrine  of  Weeley  further,  dlstlnsulshes  between  the  complete 
purification  from  sin  and  a  later-oecarrlng  Baptism  of  the  Spirit, 
with  reception  of  special  gifts  of  grace,  —  speaking  with  tongues, 
healing  the  sick  and  the  like."  Only,  this  development  did  not 
need  to  wait  for  the  German  Pentecost  people  to  make  It 

"Cf.  bla  booklet,  BrkUtrongen  tlber  mefne  Ldirlrrungen  (1912). 

"hoc.  dt.,  eol.  23fi. 

"  Op.  ott..  p.  4S7. 

"Benser  (op.  <At.,  p.  41)  assigns  him  bis  place  thus:  "DUTer- 
enccs  In  types  of  piety  are  produeed  by  national  ctaaiactn,  by 
Individual  dispositions,  often  not  spiritually  purified,  or  by  an 
especially  stnmg  development  of  a  sln^e  trait  of  piety.  The  na- 
tlcnal  character  aaserts  ItaeU  espedslly  in  WOrttAmberg  and  In 
the  Bast-Oerman  provlnoea.  The  Swabtan  diaracter  tends  to  make 
VUlowshlp  Christians  who  build  up  a  sterling  piety  with  Innv 
sensibility  and  prefer  to  remain  In  retlremettt  rather  than  to  vh 
pear  In  public.  On  the  other  band  the  Bast-Oerman  character, 
which  tends  In  other  matters  also  to  extrone  conceptions,  works 
tn  the  Fellowshtp  Qirlstlanlty  also  towards  affording  glad  hos- 
pitality to  all  sensational,  out-oMhe-common  notleos.  Indlridiul 
traits  of  character  have  made  Pastor  Paul  a  lanaUaal  Christian, 
with  asptratlons  stretching  beyond  aD  earthly  Umlta."  "Pastor" 
Paul  belongs  to  tbe  BaatGerman  stodL 

"Ailegnoetne  Brsng.-Luth.  Klrchenzeltnng,  1904,  p.  MM.  JeV 
llnihsM  ml^t  very  well,  pnbaps.  have  bad  Otto  Stoekmayer  him- 
self In  view,  had  ka  atteaded  dosely  to  what  he  already  had  salt 
la  his  aMreas  to  the  Onadaa  Confsrsnu  of  1876  n  "  Die  Christ- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


38  BihUotheca  8aora  [Jan. 

llehe  Tollkommenbelt,"  whlcli  JelUngbaufl  <d.  T06,  note)  pralsea 
u  not  only  admlr&ble,  but  thorougbly  Biblical.  In  that  address 
(p.  27  ot  tbe  reprint)  be  declares  that  tbe  consciousness  that  God 
intends  to  bring  us  into  likeness  to  the  Lamb  will  sare  us  trora 
being  satisDed  with  any  half-way  perfection:  "  I  can  be  a  membo' 
of  the  Bride  only  with  a  holiness  which  can  abide  the  eye  of  God, 
the  angels  and  the  devils,"  because  what  comes  from  Qod  can 
stand  in  tbe  sight  of  Qod,  He  afterwards  became  notorious  as 
tbe  advocate  of  the  possibility  and  duty  of  attaining  this  perfect 
holiness  on  eartb.  "His  farorlte  Idea,"  says  a  writer  In  Die 
CbrtsUlcbe  Welt  (1906.  col.  877,  note),  "is  tbe  establishment  of  a 
small  congregation  of  the  elect.  In  whom  sanetlScation  takes  place 
even  unto  victory  over  death,  and  makes  the  coming  of  Christ 
possible."  Cf.  Tb.  Hardeland,  ffeue  klrchllche  Zeltscbrift,  1898, 
p.  69. 

"Cf.  OelBhom,  Utc.  cit.,  col.  89S:  "On  tbe  subject  of  sanctlflca* 
tlon  conceptions  within  the  rellowsblp  Movement  diOer,  It  must 
be  confessed,  very  widely,  and  It  is  Jelllnghaus  who  shows  here 
to  advantage  —  because  of  his  moderation  and  prudence.  While 
others,  such  as  POckler,  Brockes  and  Paul  sharply  distlngulsti 
sanetlScation.  in  point  of  time,  from  Justification,  and  expect  It 
from  a  special  baptism  of  the  Spirit  subsequently  to  an  already 
accomplished  JuBtification,  thinking  of  It  therefore  more  In  the 
form  of  a  sudden  violent  Irruption  IDureMnich)  while  the  man 
remains  completely  passive;  according  to  Jelllngtiaus  the  begin- 
nlng  of  sanctlQcatlon  comes  witb  justlflcatlon,  and  the  filling  with 
the  Holy  Qhost  is  a  matter  indnslve  of  tbe  voluntary  element  of 
faithfulness  and  advance  In  personal  surrender  to  Christ  more  and 
more  to  completion.  Accordingly,  also,  Jellingbaus  holds  himself 
far  from  the  folly  of  Perfectionism  which  In  Paul  has  Its  kemeet 
advocate,  —  Paul  who  in  public  meetlngB  has  declared  that  he  no 
mora  commits  any  sin.  According  to  Jellin^ftus  the  actual  holi- 
ness of  every  converted  man  consists  in  his  holding  himself  free 
from  every  contdotu  or  intentional  transgression  of  the  divine 
law." 

*We  are  quoting  It  from  the  Allgemelne  ESrang.-Luth.  Klrchen- 
seitnng,  1S04,  p.  632. 

"The  Allgemelne  Bvang.-Luth.  Kirch enzeltung  quotes,  along  with 
this  report  of  "  Pastor  "  Paul's  description  of  his  experiences,  a  warn- 
ing commoit  printed  by  Adolf  StOcker  In  tbe  pages  of  the  Journal, 
Reformation:  "Of  course,"  he  says,  "  I  do  not  doubt  the  veracity  of 
Brother  Paul  in  a  single  word.  But  I  am  full  of  doubt  whether  It 
is  wholesome  to  describe  in  detail  and  Justify  such  experiences.  As 
personal  experiences  they  stand  far  above  the  self-Judgment  of  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  "Die  Beiligungsbewegung"  39 

greatest  moi  of  laith  In  Holr  Writ  David  confesses  In  Pa.  xlx.  U, 
'  Who  can  discern  bla  eirora?  Cleanse  Thou  me  from  hidden  faults.' 
And  Paul  denies  of  himself  that  he  la  already  perfect  Pastor  Paul, 
if  he  feels  himself  freed  from  all  propensity  to  sin.  Is  perfect  We 
have  to  do,  therefore.  In  bis  case  with  a  super-Blblleal  standpoint 
Bren  John  In  the  third  chapter  of  his  Epistle  does  not  go  so  tar. 
.  .  .  Ih&t  tho-e  lies  In  Pastor  Paul's  self-declaration  a  great  dan- 
ger for  himself  and  for  the  readers  of  his  Journal  is  certain.  I 
recall  with  great  sorrow  Pearsall  Smith,  Idel,  and  Fries,  and  many 
others  who  spoke  precisely  like  Brother  Paul,  and  afterwards  made 
shipwreck.  Ood  preserve  Eyangellcal  Christianity  from  such  self- 
deceptions  and  breakdowns!  " 

"Cf.  the  report  of  the  meeting  of  the  Conference  In  the  Allge- 
melne  Brang.-Luth.  Klrchenxeltimg,  1904,  col.  676;  also  Herzog- 
Hauck,  loc.  dt.,  p.  636;  Benser,  op.  cit.,  p.  86;  P.  Qennrich,  Wleder- 
geburt  und  HeillKung  (1908),  pp.  50  ft. 

"  The  language  Is  here  derived  from  Paul's  explanation  In  Hell- 
Igung,  Feb.  1906,  pp.  12-14,  as  cited  by  P.  Qennrich. 

*  In  this  discussion  we  are  dependent  on  Qennrich,  op.  cit. 

"Paul,  Reich  Chrlsti  (1906),  pp.  136 f.,  144;  HeUlgung,  Feb.  1906, 
p.  14. 

"Reich  Chrlsti  (1905),  pp.  130 f. 

'  Svndenlotigkeit. 

"Heich  Chrtetl  (1906),  pp.  140,  143, 

"  Op,  cit.,  p.  B. 

■Reich  ChrisU,  p.  130. 

■  Op.  cit.,  p.  62. 

**  Reich  Cbrlstl,  p.  367,  cited  by  Qennrich,  op.  cit.,  pp.  44,  45. 

"  Op.  cit.,  pp.  44,  46. 

•J&rck,  loc.  cit.,  p.  642. 

"Das  TOlllge,  gegemriUtige  Bell  durch  Christum,  1880,  1886,  IS90, 
1898.  1908. 

"Cf.  the  accounts  of  Jarck,  loc  cit.,  pp.  580-531,  and  Slppell,  loc. 
cit..  coll.  100  f. 

"  Jelllngbans  had  never  been  blind  to  this  aspect  of  the  move- 
ment: only,  he  had  treated  It  heretofore  as  an  accident  and  not  its 
essence.  In  the  height  of  his  advocacy  of  the  movement  he  could 
write  as  follows  (op.  cit.,  p.  43G):  "Although  R.  P.  Smith  de- 
clared often:  'I  desire  communion  In  the  sufferings  of  Christ 
rather  than  In  the  Joys  of  C9irlst'  yet  the  Biblical  verities  of  pain- 
ful coauffering  with  Christ  of  the  sufferings  of  prleatly-mlnded 
Christians  (such  as  Paul  describes  2  Cor.  111.  B.;  Rom.  vlll.;  Phil. 
111.:  CoL  1.  24)  — espedaUy  of  the  life  of  persecution  of  the  mem- 
bers of  Christ,  and  of  their  strlTlnga  unto  blood  under  affliction. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


10  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

•oom  and  Inward  mortlflcatlon,  retired  too  mucb  Into  tbe  back- 
ground. Uany  spoke  as  U  men  were  already  llTlng  Id  the  mUlen- 
nlum,  and  very  Inadequately  recognized  the  mighty  power  of 
Antl-ChrlBtianltf  and  therefore  Insufficiently  alM>  the  Uruggla 
against  It  ae  a  prleeUy  taak  of  the  aalnU  (Heb.  zlL  4)."  In  the 
preceding  pag«a  (pp.  433  (.)  he  makes  some  criticisms  also  of 
Smlth'B  methods. 

"  E^'klHrungen  dber  melne  Iiebrirrungeo  (1912.  Terlag  of  Prack 
ft  Co.,  LIchtenrade,  pp.  61), 

"  Among  these  should  be  especially-  mentioned  Emat  Helnatoeh, 
Die  ErlBla  der  HellfgungBbegrlSes  In  der  Oemelnschaftsbewegung 
der  Oegenvart  (1913).  While  stlU  defwdlng  JelUngbaus's  former 
teaching,  Hematsch  seeks  to  separate  It  from  Its  Inseparable  Wes- 
leyan  content  and  tmm  Its  logical  Issue  In  the  Perfectionism  of 
"  FaatOT  "  Paul.  An  earlier  book  from  outside  the  Fellowoblp  df- 
elee,  Ernat  Rtetschel'a  LutberlBche  Reehttertlgungaldire  Oder  mod- 
erne  HelllgungsMireT  (1909).  should  be  read  In  this  eonneetten. 
Rletsctael  argues  that  Jelllngbans  has  taken  the  wrong  way  tg 
correct  the  later  Lutheran  dogmatldana:  we  must  not  borrow 
tram  tbe  Wetleyana  but  retnm  to  Luther. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE  GREEK  GENESIS,  THE  GRAP-WELLHAUSEN 

THEOBY,  AKD  THE  CONSEEVATIVE 

POSITION 

HASOU)   U.   TtllNMB,   H.A,,  LL.B.,  OF   LINCOLN'S   INN 
BABKISTBft-AT-LAW 

In  The  American  Journal  of  Semitic  Languagea  and  Lt^ 
eraturea  for  April,  1918,  there  is  an  important  and  aignift- 
cant  article  on  "  The  Greek  Genesis  "  by  Professor  A.  T. 
Olmstead.  A  farther  contribution  is  promiBed,  and  will  not 
improbably  have  been  published  before  the  present  paper 
appears;  bnt  in  these  days  I  cannot  rely  on  seeing  the 
sequel  by  any  given  date,  and  there  is  too  much  in  the 
first  contribution  that  calls  for  early  notice  to  render  any 
postponement  of  the  discussion  wise.  Indeed,  an  oppor- 
tnnity  has  now  occurred  where  further  debate  seems  likely 
to  be  exceptionally  helpful.  Unfortunately  it  is  not  pos- 
sible for  me,  in  the  odds  and  ends  of  time  which  alone  are 
at  my  disposal,  to  consider  carefully  every  point  that  has 
been  raised,  and  some  of  them  must  be  left  until  a  resump- 
tion of  normal  conditions  makes  it  possible  (or  me  to 
tackle  them  in  the  ordinary  course  of  my  studies,  but 
enough  remains  for  fruitful  discussion. 

There  are  six  main  observations  to  be  made  on  Olm- 
Btead's  paper,  and  I  will  begin  by  stating  them,  because, 
in  dealing  with  his  views,  I  shall  have  to  quote  passages 
which  illnstrate  more  than  one  at  a  time.  The  Importance 
of  the  paper  is  due  to  the  first  three.  1.  It  is  enormously 
significant  and  entirely  unprecedented  that  any  higher 
critical  organ  in  the  English-speaking  world  should  spon- 
taneonsly  publish  a  paper  that  so  severely  criticiEefl  the 
treatment  of  the  versions  by  the  documentary  theorists  and 
concedes  so  much  of  the  conservative  case.  2.  On  a  nnm< 
ber  of  points  Olmstead,  working  independently,  has  reached 
conclusions  that  closely  resemble  eontentions  that  have 
been  put  forward  in   these  pages.    3.  On  several  other 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


42  BibHotkeca  Sacra  [Jan. 

points  the  differences  are  of  sach  a  cliaracter  that  farther 
study  and  debate  woold  probably  remove,  or  at  any  rate 
reduce,  them.  i.  On  the  other  hand,  there  has  been  an  un- 
fortunate delay  In  publication ;  and  Olmstead,  in  order  the 
better  to  show  the  independent  resemblances  between  us^ 
has  intentionally  refrained  from  bringing  his  article  up 
to  date.  5.  He  is  under  a  misconception  as  to  the  stand- 
point of,  I  believe,  many  conserratires,  certain^  includ- 
ing myself.  6.  He  ignores  the  fact  that  the  main  attack 
on  the  Oraf-WeUhausen  theory  has  nothing  whatever  to 
do  with  the  textual  questions.  To  avoid  any  possibility 
of  misconception,  let  me  say  at  once  that  I  do  not  believe 
that,  if  he  had  so  much  as  hinted  at  the  real  state  of  af- 
faire, The  American  Journal  of  Semitic  Languages  would 
have  published  him  at  all.  Thus  while  I  regard  his  atti- 
tude as  unfortunate  from  one  point  of  view,  there  is  another 
standpoint  from  which  it  is  wise  and  diplomatic.  Better 
half  a  loaf  than  no  bread.  Better  that  Olmstead  should 
sncceed  in  printing  some  tmth  in  The  American  Journal 
of  Semitic  Languages  than  that  he  should  be  excluded 
altogether  because  he  wanted  to  tell  too  much. 

The  two  following  passages  illustrate  more  than  one  of 
the  foregoing  comments: — 

"  The  present  paper  was  began  in  1914  and  virtually 
completed  in  the  summer  of  1915.  Numerous  passages 
have  been  deliberately  left  nnchanged  in  order  that  they 
might  be  compared  with  the  results  of  Wiener,  whose  con- 
clusions, published  in  tbe  Bibliotheca  Sacra  in  recent 
years,  as  well  as  in  Essays  in  PentateucJial  Criticism,  Pen- 
tateuchal  Studies,  and  Origin  of  the  Pentateuch,  have,  in 
spite  of  tbeir  tot^y  different  purpose  and  their  apologetic 
point  of  view,  been  remarkably  like  those  which  the  writer 
has  discovered,  working  in  almost  complete  independence 
and  OD  the  basis  of  the  work  done  on  Kings  "  (p.  148,  foot- 
note 1). 

"  The  discussion  which  follows  was  already  written  down 
when  there  came  to  hand  the  study  of  this  passage  by 
Wiener,  Bihl.  Sacra,  LXXIII,  140  ff.  It  has  been  left  un- 
changed in  order  that  the  striking  coincidences  in  results 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1»1»]  The  Greek  Geneaia  43 

obtained  from  sach  different  atandpointa  may  be  the  more 
clearly  shown"  (p.  156,  footnote  2i.' 

Both  paBsages  rest  upon  a  complete  misunderstanding 
of  my  standpoint,  which  is  called  "  apologetic  "  —  what- 
ever that  may  mean.  The  difference  between  Olmatead  and 
myself  is  mach  less  than  he  sapposee.  Both  of  us  are 
seeking  to  follow  the  truth  whithersoerer  it  may  lead; 
both  of  us  started  with  a  classical  training.  But  here 
comes  the  distinction.  He  came  to  these  studies  as  part 
of  his  historical  work,  and  in  the  course  of  it  has  become 
dubious  about  the  documentary  theory :  I  came  to  them  at 
a  time  when  I  bad  not  studied  the  higher  criticism  or  re> 
fleeted  on  its  implications,  as  the  result  of  work  on  com- 
parative historical  jurisprudence  which  enabled  me  to  see 
at  a  glance  that  the  evolutionary  hypothesis  —  the  Oraf- 
Wellhaosen  theory  proper,  not  necessarily  the  division 
into  documents  —  was  utterly  false,  whatever  might  be 
true.*  If  the  legislation  (subject  only  to  textual  criticism) 
■This  quotation  refers  to  Oen.  xzxi.  Parenthetlcall;  1  may 
not«  an  unrortunats  result  of  Olmstead's  method.  I  have  not 
been  able  to  discover  how  near  he  thinks  we  can  get  to  the  orlg- 
Ina]  form  of  this  passage.  Apparently  he  believes  that  the  Greek 
Klves  us  an  "  Elohfstlc  "  text  with  c^taln  very  late  Interpolations, 
rather  than  two  separate  E  and  J  documents.  It  would  have  been 
better  if,  after  reading  my  paper,  he  had  appended  a  note  saylDg 
exactly  where  he  agreed  and  differed. 

'  Perhaps  I  may  take  this  opportunity  of  correcting  a  story  that 
seems  to  have  gained  cuireDcy  In  America.  It  Is  said  that  Dean 
Wace  In  converBatlon  with  a  Jewish  scholar  about  the  higher  crlt- 
tdsm  asked  what  the  Jews  were  doing,  and  that  my  first  book  was 
the  reply.  The  eonveraatlon  Is,  1  believe,  authentic,  but  It  had 
notbtsK  to  do  with  my  coming  to  the  Biblical  field,  and  I  heard 
of  It  (or  the  first  time  after  the  publication  of  Studies  In  Biblical 
tMvr.  It  was  a  study  of  Sir  Henry  Maine's  writings,  unaided  by 
any  other  external  infiuence  whatever,  that  led  me  to  take  up  this 
work.  On  the  other  hand,  It  was  an  article  by  Dean  Wace  that 
Introduced  me  to  the  London  Churchman,  to  which  I  contributed 
tor  some  years.  The  Blbllotheca  Sacra  I  discovered  through  look- 
ing up  an  article  of  Kyle's  on  Egypt  and  the  sacrlflclil  system,  the 
title  of  which  occurred  In  the  bibliography  of  the  Hieologlsche 
Utentturselttmg. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


4A  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

was  to  be  oBBigned  to  Moses  on  hifrtorico-l^al  gronnds,  the 
cnirent  theory  could  not  stand.  Of  coarse  the  discovery  of 
the  actual  truth  and  of  just  where  the  critics  had  gone  off 
the  rails  waa  quite  a  different  matter,  and  for  years  it  nev^ 
eroD  occurred  to  me  to  suspect  that  the  entire  phUological 
and  theological  professoriate  of  the  leading  countries  of 
the  world  had  simply  ignored  the  overwhelming  maaa  of 
the  textual  evidaice.  They  always  professed  to  qnote  the 
versioDB,  and  an  examination  of  the  extant  readings  was 
sncb  an  obvious  and  indispensable  preliminary  to  the  tot- 
mation  of  any  theory  of  origin  that  I  naturally  supposed 
that  their  citations  from  the  versions  represented  the  max- 
imum of  what  could  profitably  be  gleaned  from  them.  That 
they  knew  nothing  whatever  about  law  was  obvious  at  the 
first  glance,  but  th^  did  pretend  to  know  something  about 
textual  criticism: 

The  standpoint  of  the  ordinary  conservative  is,  I  think, 
somewhat  different  from  that  of  either  Olmstead  or  my- 
self. In  studying  the  higher  criticism  he  finds  two  main 
views:  viz.  (1)  that  the  Old  Testament  is  a  fraud  with 
which  God  had  nothing  to  do;  and  (2)  that  the  Old  Testa- 
ment is  a  fraud  to  which  God  was  a  party.  If,  for  any 
reason,  he  is  Jed  to  believe  that  there  is  a  righteous  Qod 
Who  had  something  to  do  with  the  Old  Testament,  be  ia 
precluded  from  accepting  either  of  the  hi^er  critical 
views.  Hence  his  opposition.  On  the  other  hand,  he  can 
have  no  possible  objection  to  the  view  of  textual  critics 
that,  in  the  course  of  transmisaion  by  human  brangs  oa 
perishable  materials,  the  text  has  suifered  deterioration; 
and,  believing  his  God  to  be  the  God  of  truth,  he  is  ready 
to  sympathiEe  with  investigations  which  have  no  other  ob- 
ject than  to  recover  as  much  truth  as  possible. 

I  now  pass  to  the  eTOluti<niary  question,  on  which  Olm- 
stead has  said  nothing.  He  has  used  language  which  rather 
seems  to  imply  that  the  documentary  theory  and  the  Graf- 
Wellliausen  hypothesis  are  identical.  That  is  not  so.  In 
the  abstract  it  is  possible  tliat  a  documentary  theory  might 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Greek  Genesis  45 

be  tme,  and  that,  neverthelesB,  the  view  of  the  history  and 
of  the  development  of  the  law  might  be  false.  If  no  doca- 
mentary  theory  be  tme,  then  of  course  all  hypotheses 
that  aim  at  dating  the  anppoaititions  docnments  are  also 
untme;  but  the  work  that  hae  been  done  for  the  demoli- 
tion of  the  documentary  theory  should  not  be  allowed  to 
obscure  the  fact  that  the  current  views  of  the  history  rest 
on  blunders  so  colossal  as  to  be  barely  credible,  so  shame- 
ful  that  nobody  who  is  committed  to  the  theory  dare  eveu 
mention  the  facts  and  arguments  by  which  they  have  beeo 
revealed.  Unlike  the  proverbial  worm,  the  Wellhausen 
critics  cannot  even  risk  indulging  in  the  luxury  of  tuming- 
wfaen  trodden  under  foot.  It  is  true  that,  in  the  matter  of 
the  versions  and  their  testimony  to  the  worthlessness  of 
Astruc's  clue  and  many  others,  the  higher  critics  have  done 
tiieir  best  to  maintain  silence  as  long  as  possible;  bnt  their 
treatment  of  this  matter  has  been  clamorous  advertise- 
ment in  comparison  with  their  refnaal  to  discuss  the  evo- 
lutionary hypothesiB.  So  far  as  I  am  aware,  there  Ib  one 
reference  to  one  little  point  in  one  footnote  of  one  book  of 
the  Wellhausen  school,  viz.  KCnig's  "  Die  Modeme  Pen- 
tateuch Ejritik  and  ihre  neueste  BekHmpfung."  In  a  note- 
on  pages  97  f.  he  goes  so  far  as  to  mention  with  a  bewil- 
dered air  that  I  have  pointed  out  that  an  altar  of  the  kind 
contemplated  by  Ex.  xi.  24-26  could  have  no  horns,  in 
view  of  the  prohibition  to  work  the  stone  employed  in  it» 
construction.  That  is  all.  No  article  discuBBing  the  fun- 
damental errors  of  the  theory  is  ever  admitted  to  a  pub- 
lication controlled  by  the  WellhauBen  critics.'  I  speak 
with  knowledge,  because  at  one  time  or  another  I  have 
tried  most  of  them  myself.  On  the  other  hand,  outside  of 
the  Wellbansen  circle  it  is  different.  Eerdmans  did  not 
'  How  tar  tbla  1b  carried  maj  appear  from  a  alngle  Instance.  On 
one  occasion  I  reBolved  to  try  ta  get  a  short  article  on  a  minor 
contention  of  the  Wellhaus^i  critics  Into  one  ot  their  periodicals. 
I  knew  my  argument  to  be  unanswerable,  because  I  had  laid  it 
before  a  leading  Continental  professor,  wlio  was  quite  unable  U> 
Mjr  a  word  in  favor  of  the  tiTpothesis  to  which  he  was  talmseir 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


46  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

hesitate  to  print  a  paper  on  the  subject  in  the  Theologisch 
Tijdschrift  for  1913,*  although  m;  facts  were  equally  de- 
structive of  some  of  the  theories  of  his  own  recently-issned 
rolnme  on  Leviticus.  He  wrote  me  that  be  did  not  object  to 
publishing  views  that  did  not  quite  agree  with  his  own.  I 
have  always  thought  that  this  attitude  did  immense  credit 
to  bis  scholarly  spirit.  Incidentally  it  clearly  reveals  one 
of  the  causes  of  the  extraordinary  inferiority  of  the  Anglo- 
American  critics.  Od  the  continent  of  Europe  men  seek 
to  arrive  at  truth:  in  the  universities  and  learned  publi- 
cations under  the  control  of  English  and  American  critics 
no  effort  is  spared  to  suppress  it.  Thus  it  comes  about  that 
no  notice  whatever  is  taken  either  of  my  publicationB  on 
the  subject  or  of  Beeve'a  article  on  "Sacrifice  (OT)"  in 
the  "International  Standard  Bible  Encyclopaedia";  and 
men  who  lack  alike  the  power  to  defend  the  Wellbausen 
theory  and  the  courage  to  break  with  it  continue  to  prop- 
agate what  has  clearly  been  proved  to  be  indefensible. 

Wellhansen'a  own  account  of  his  position  may  be  fonnd 
on  page  368  of  the  English  translation  of  bis  "  Prol^o- 
mena  " :  "1  differ  from  Oraf  chiefly  in  this,  that  I  always 
go  back  to  the  centralisation  of  the  cnltos,  and  deduce  from 
it  the  particular  divergences.  My  whole  position  is  con- 
tained in  my  first  chapter."  Here  are  a  few  of  the  points : — 

1.  Wellhansen  holds  that  all  slaughter  of  domestic  ani- 
mals for  food  was  sacrificial  till  the  time  of  Joslah,  i.e.  the 
centraliMtion  of  the  cultus.  This  is  rebutted  by  the  fol- 
lowing passages:  Gen.  xviii.  7;  xxvii.  9-14;  xliii.  16;  E3i. 
ixi.  3T  (EV  xxii.  1),  (the  catUe  thief);  Judges  yi.  19; 
1  Sam.  viii.  13 ;  xxv.  11 ;  zxviii.  24 ;  1  Kings  zix.  21.  Either 

committed.  Accordingly  I  applied  to  Dr.  Orr,  who  was  confident 
tbat  lie  could  get  a.  note  Into  the  periodical  in  question-  I  wrote 
m?  paper,  Dr.  Orr  eent  It  In,  and  It  was  accepted,  but  never  pub- 
llabed.  After  waiting  for  two  years  I  wrote  a  mild  letter  of  la- 
qnlnr.  Six  weeks  later  my  article  waa  returned.  The  point  In  quee- 
tlon  has  never  been  noticed  In  any  higher  critical  book. 
'"Ib  the  Graf-Wellhauien  HypotheafB  Tenable,"  pp.  19B-207. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Greek  Oenesia  47 

hu  followers  can  answer  this  or  they  cannot.     Hitherto 
thej  bare  mvariably  ignored  it. 

2.  The  law  and  the  history  alike  contemplate  two  en- 
tirely different  kinds  of  altars,  both  of  which  were  in  use 
concurrently.  Here  I  wonld  press  my  readers  to  torn  to 
my  Ulastrated  article  "Altar "  in  the  "  International 
Standard  Bible  Encyclopaedia."  From  the  first  two  flgnres 
they  will  see  how  impossible  it  was  for  any  contemporary 
to  confnse  the  two.  The  one  was  a  cairn  of  earth  or  on- 
hewn  stones,  or  a  single  large  stone,  necessarily  varying 
in  size  and  appearance  with  the  materials  of  which  it  was 
composed.  It  was  on  the  level,  and,  as  appears  from  the 
reason  given  for  the  prohibition  of  steps,  used  by  laymen, 
not  by  priests  (who  wore  breeches).  It  could  not  possibly 
have  horns.  On  the  other  hand,  there  was  a  homed  altar 
of  bronze  (or  wood)  of  prescribed  size  and  dimensions.  It 
was  raised,  so  that  one  "  went  up  "  on  it,  and  served  by 
priests.  The  horns  were  an  essential  feature.  Both  these 
altars  appear  side  by  side  in  the  early  history  long  before 
the  date  to  which  Deuteronomy  (let  alone  the  Priestly 
Code)  is  assigned  (contrast  1  Kings  i.  50  f.;  ii.  28  ff.; 
Amos  iii.  li  with  the  sacrifices  of  Saul,  Adonijah,  Manoah, 
etc.).  They  served  different  purposes,  just  as  individual 
and  famUy  prayer  coexist  at  the  present  day  with  congre- 
gational worship  in  public  structures.  Wellhausen  and  bis 
■chool  have  hopelessly  confused  these  two  kinds  of  altar. 

3.  WbOe  Wellhauaen  postulates  a  period  during'which 
a  plurality  of  "  sanctuaries  "  was  permissible,  followed  by 
a  centralization,  the  truth  is  that  the  whole  theory  rests 
on  the  mental  confusion  imparted  by  the  use  of  the  term 
"  sanctuary "  and  Wellbausen's  failure  to  collect  all  the 
passages  that  bear  on  the  question.  An  altar  of  earth  or 
stones  was  not  a  "sanctuary"  in  any  true  sense.  The 
Honse  of  the  Lord  with  its  homed  altar  was.  Both  are 
found  side  by  aide  in  the  l^slation  and  history  that 
Wellhansen  considers  early;  but,  in  addition  to  nefj^ecting 
the  evidence  of  the  passages  from  Kings  and  Amos  cited 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


48  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

above,  he  has  miBsed  Ex.  xxiii,  19;  xzxiv.  26;  Josh.  ix.  23, 
27;  Dcut.  xvi.  21  (lay  altars  in  Deuteronomy).  His  whole 
case  rests  on  these  omisBions  and  his  inability  to  distin- 
guish between  a  house  and  a  cairn  once  he  has  applied 
the  fuddling  label  "  sanctuaiy  "  to  these  entirely  different 
erections. 

4.  So  far  does  this  go  that  many  of  his  followers  have 
pinned  the  ear  of  the  slave  of  Bx.  xxi.  6  to  the  door  or  door^ 
post  of  a  cairn  which  they  had  previously  called  a  "  sanc- 
tuary "  and  then  mistaken  for  a  house.  I  cannot  put  the 
matter  more  clearly  than  I  have  done  in  a  note  on  page 
187  of  " Essays  in  Pentateuchal  Criticism " :  "I  have  re- 
peatedly pointed  out  that  the  confusion  engendered  by  the 
word  '  sanctuary '  reaches  its  climax  in  the  writings  of 
such  authors  as  Driver  and  Robertson  Smith.  The  lat- 
ter writes :  '  The  local  sanctuaries  were  the  seat  of  Judg- 
ment, and  so  in  the  language  of  S  [so  he  designates  this 
**  source "]  to  bring  a  man  before  the  magistrates  is  to 
bring  him  "  to  God  "  (Exod.  xii.  6;  ixii.  8,  9,  Heb.).'  (Ad- 
ditional Answer  to  the  Libel,  p.  74.)  It  is  well  known  that 
'  the  seat  of  judgment '  was  the  gate  of  the  city,  not  a  lay 
altar :  and  it  is  tolerably  obvious  that  the  door  or  doorpost 
presupposed  by  Exodus  xxi.  is  lacking  to  a  stone  or  mound, 
albeit  present  in  a  gate.  The  stoutest  opponents  of  the 
hi^er  critics  would  have  thought  it  impossible  that  they 
should  be  so  hopelessly  incompetent  as  to  be  nnable  to 
distinguish  between  a  mound  and  a  house,  and  that  merely 
because  they  had  called  both  these  objects  '  sanctuaries ' ; 
but,  unfortunately,  the  facts  admit  of  no  doubt.  It  is 
never  wise  in  matters  l^al  or  historical  to  call  a  spade  a 
sanctified  excavatory  implement." 

5.  Wellhausen's  ignorance  of  the  distinction  between 
substantive  law  and  procedure  and  his  consequent  failure 
to  observe  it  in  his  treatment  of  the  sacrificial  law  is  re- 
sponsible for  much  that  he  has  written.* 

These  points,   and   many  others,  will  be  found  elab- 
'  See  EPC,  pp.  £08  ft. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Greek  Oene»i«  49 

orated  in  the  articles  "Altar,"  "Aaylom,"  "  Sacrifice," 
"Sanctaary,"  in  the  "International  Standard  Bible  En- 
cyclopaedia," the  sixth  chapter  of  "  EsBays  in  Pentatenchal 
Criticism,"  and  other  passages  of  my  writings.  Together 
they  constitute  the  true  answer  to  the  Wellhansen  hypoth- 
esis. It  is  fatile  to  ask  Olmstead  to  examine  them,  be- 
cause he  would  never  be  allowed  to  publish  his  results  in 
The  Americ^m  Journal  of  Semitic  Languages  or  any  other 
organ  noder  critical  control. 

The  questions  relating  to  the  sanctuary  and  sacrifice  are, 
however,  of  great  importance  in  dealing  with  the  versions. 
As  I  hare  come  to  know  more  of  the  text,  I  have  seen  rea- 
son to  believe  that  there  has  been  heavy  temple  glossing; 
and  this  is  a  very  material  point  in  considering  the  rela- 
tionship of  the  Samaritan,  the  Vnlgate,  and  the  LXX  to 
the  Massoretic  text.'  Moreover,  I  have  been  led  to  think 
that,  while  Wellhansen's  main  blunders  are  patent  enon^, 
the  existing  Hebrew  text  probably  presents  difficulties 
which  were  absent  in  earlier  times.'  I  believe  that  the 
help  we  may  expect  from  this  source  in  studying  the  his- 
tory of  the  sacrificial  system  is  not  yet  exhausted,  and 
that  the  tntnre  may  yet  have  many  surprises  in  store 
for  OS. 

Olmstead's  own  general  attitude  appears  from  the  fol- 
lowing ] 


"  The  independent  scholar,  who  is  not  wedded  to  the  cur- 
rent theory,  cannot  but  admit  that  there  seems  consider- 
able need  of  the  restatement  of  the  versions'  importance. 
The  new  attack  has  forced  the  higher  criticism  to  recon- 
sider the  basis  of  positions  which  were  fast  becoming  a. 
new  and  rather  hide-bound  orthodoxy,  it  has  demand^  a: 
more  radical  criticism  of  the  Massoretic  Text,  it  has  shown 
a  surprisingly  large  amount  of  editorial  redaction  of  a. 
surprisingly  late  date.  How  needed  was  this  attack  can 
be  realized  when  we  find  the  leader  of  the  now  conservative 
critics  asserting  that  '  while  the  LXX  contains  partic- 
ular readings  which  are  shown  by  internal  evidence  to  be 

'See  BS,  Jan.   1916.  pp.  721t,110f. 

■  See  BS,  Oct  1916,  pp.  609-619. 
Vol.  UtXVI.    No.  301.    4 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


50  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

stiperior  to  the  Hebrew,  j-et  an  examination  of  its  general 
text  proves  that  on  the  whole  it  ia  inferior  to  the  Masso- 
retic  Hebrew.  I  do  not  think  that  this  will  be  disputed  by 
any  competent  Old  Testament  scholar.  The  MT  is  often 
emended  from  the  liXX,  but  practically  never  except  for 
some  superiority,  real  or  supposed,  attaching  to  the  read- 
ing presupposed  by.  JjXX.  in  particular  cases'  (Skinner, 
Divine  Names,  166). 

" '  If  therefore,  a  textual  critic  gives  the  preference  to 
UKX  readings,  as  such,  he  must  be  prepared  to  maintain 
the  general  superiority  of  its  tewt.  .  .  .  But  if  he  essays  this, 
he  will  speedily  land  himself  in  a  reductio  ad  ahaurdum 
of  the  critical  axiom  with  which  he  starts.  It  Is  notorious 
that  the  JJXX  contains  many  readings  which  presuppose  a 
Hebrew  text,  not  only  inferior  to  the  MT,  but  absolutely 
inadmissible;  i.e.,  one  which  no  commentator  with  a  re- 
gard for  the  meaning  of  the  passage  could  possibly  accept ' 
(/fttd.,  168flf.). 

"After  such  a  confession  of  faith,  or  rather  lack  of  faith, 
it  is  not  surprising  to  find  that  his  elaborate  commentary 
on  Genesis  has  no  section  on  the  versions,  and  that  when 
he  quotes  them  he  is  far  from  accurate"  (p.  146 f.). 
And  again: — 

"A  renewed  study  of  the  problem  is  therefore  not  out  of 
place,  specially  by  one  who,  because  of  his  position  as  a 
teacher  of  history,  must  necessarily  take  a  somewhat  neu- 
tral point  of  view,  who  has  never  been  committed  to  any 
one  school,  and  who  is  inclined  to  find  much  of  good  in 
'  conservative '  and  '  critic '  alike.  The  purpose  of  the 
paper  is  not,  to  be  sure,  the  reconstruction  of  the  original 
text  of  Genesis,  nor  is  it  primarily  intended  to  test  the 
higher  criticism  or  the  results  of  the  new  school.  Bather 
it  is  the  much  legs  ambitious  one  of  discovering  the  in- 
stances where  the  study  of  the  Greek  translation  assists 
the  historian  in  the  problem  of  the  sources,  and  other 
qnestions  are  only  incidentally  touched  "  (p.  148) . 

His  exclusion  is  also  worthy  of  careful  attention.  His 
study  of  Astruc's  cine  has  unfortunately  been  marred  by 
bis  decision  to  leave  standing  what  he  had  written  in 
lfil4r-15,  without  reference  to  later  work.  Thus  his  dis- 
cussion is  meager  and  unsatisfactory,  and  very  different 
from  what  might  be  expected  if  he  now  examined  care- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Oreek  Otneaia  51 

folly  all  tliat  has  been  written  on  the  conservatlTe  side. 
Bat  even  so  the  result  is  noteworthy: 

"Now  jnat  what  does  this  all  mean?  In  a  few  cases 
Astmc's  clue  is  certainly  misleading,  in  a  few  other  cases 
that  possibility  mast  be  left  an  open  question.  On  the 
whole  the  manuscripts  and  versions  we  woold  nse  with  the 
utmost  confidence  agree  essentially  with  the  Massoretic 
Text  in  their  readings  of  the  divine  names.  If  the  current 
theory  is  incorrect,  that  must  be  proved  on  other  grounds. 

"Without  the  later  paper  it  is  obviously  impossible  to 
mm  up  all  the  evidence  for  and  against  the  theory.  Id  cer- 
tain cases  we  have  seen  the  theory  corrected,  and  other 
examples  will  be  given  in  a  later  paper.  The  corrections 
may  considerably  modify  the'  details ;  as  to  the  theory  as 
a  whole  once  more  we  must  give  a  non  liquet. 

"  The  exact  situation  is  not,  after  all,  quite  correctly 
expressed  in  the  last  sentence.  The  higher  critic  has  sinned 
in  not  devoting  more  attention  to  the  evidence  of  the  lower, 
and  in  some  cases  this  has  unfavorably  affected  his  results. 
He  has  also  made  a  strategic  error  in  not  utilizing  to  the 
full  the  evidence  which  so  regularly  proves,  and  proves  in 
later  times  than  he  had  assumed,  the  processes  which  the 
critical  theory  considers  basal.  In  Genesis  we  do  not  have 
editorial  redaction  to  the  same  extent  as  in  Kings,  for  ex- 
ample, but  we  have  enough  for  proof,  and  it  is  the  more 
emphatic  in  that  it  is  found  in  tiie  Law.  If  the  Law,  the 
most  sacred  of  the  Hebrew  writings,  was  not  free  from 
editorial  redaction  until  long  after  the  date  of  the  Greek 
translation^  a  fortiori  we  may  expect  more  elaborate  edit- 
ing in  the  less  sacred.  Certainly,  to  the  student  who  has 
familiarized  himself  with  the  editorial  activities  indicated 
l^  the  versions,  there  is  nothing  strange  in  the  similar 
activities  postulated  by  the  Oraf-Euenen-Wellhausen  the- 
ory" (pp.  168-169). 

So  before  the  appearance  of  the  work  of  1915  and  mib- 
sequent  years,  Olmstead  had  already  been  driven  to  a  posi- 
tion so  far  from  that  of  the  documentary  tiieorists.  How 
remote  it  is  from  their  conclusions  he  does  not  seem  to 
realise.  The  "editorial  activitieii"  are  not  merely  later 
than  anything  postulated  by  the  documentary  theorists; 
fhey  are  destructive  of  the  theory.  A  concrete  instance 
will  best  show  this.    Take  the  passage  in  Gen.  xzxi.  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


62  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

which  be  devotes  attention.  According  to  the  docnmen- 
taiy  theorists  this  has  been  brought  into  existence  through 
the  interlacing  (circa  650  b.c.)  of  two  documents  —  J 
{circa  860  B.c.)  and  E  (circa  760  b.c.).  According  to  01m- 
stead  there  is  only  a  single  Elohistic  document,  no  J  at  all, 
and  additions  after  250  s.c.  One  document  instead  of  two, 
Astmc'B  clue  "misleading,"  and  a  difference  of  six  cen- 
turies in  date!  That  in  his  view  proves  "the  processes 
which  the  critical  theory  considers  basal."  I  should  have 
thought  that  if  there  was  any  process  which  could  be  so 
described,  it  was  the  compilation  from  two  or  more  inde- 
pendent documents,  and  that  if  Olmstead's  view  be  right 
at  all  it  absolutely  disproves  this  "  basal "  process. 

I  desire  to  repeat  and  indorse  what  Olmstead  says  of 
the- Hebrew  MSB.:— 

"  While  the  additions  by  this  means  cannot  be  expected  to 
be  large  or  important,  yet  it  is  perfectly  clear  that  the 
scholar  who  will  nndertake  the  laborious  task  of  recollat- 
ing  and  studying  from  the  genealogical  point  of  view  the 
various  extant  Hebrew  manuscripts  will  have  made  a  dis- 
tinct contribution  to  the  final  reconstruction  of  the  text, 
and  it  is  not  impossible  that  startling  agreements  with 
the  versions  may  be  found"  (pp.  148-149). 
Is  it  too  much  to  hope  that  some  wealthy  American  Uni- 
versity may  see  its  way  to  undertaking  this  enterpriseT 
What  with  the  larger  Cambridge  LXX,  the  Benedictine 
work  on  the  Vulgate,  Von  Gall's  edition  of  the  Samaritan, 
and  the  textual  labors  of  the  German  universities,  it  may 
reasonably  be  thought  that  this  field  should  be  appro- 
priated by  the  United  States  before  other  nations  inter- 
vene. 

Before  we  turn  to  Olmstead's  remarks  as  to  the  Samar- 
itan, his  view  of  Gen.  ziv.  must  be  considered. 
**At  the  first  glance  we  observe  that  the  Greek  itself  is 
somewhat  strange,  ^paye^poo;  «^1^o?=;Bn^^!  ir</30T7?="iOT- 
The  last  two  are  unique,  the  other  unique  for  the  Penta- 
teuch, A  subject  for  thought  is  that  Aquila  has  ■tr€p»tT*yi, 
virtually  the  same  reading.    We  at  once  begin  to  suspect 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Greek  Genesis  53 

that  the  passage  may  be  a  late  Insertion  in  the  Greek  and 
80  in  the  Hebrew  original "  (p.  165) . 

Now  before  arguing  that  different  tPanslationB  of  He- 
brew words  betray  a  different  and  later  rendering  of  the 
chapter  as  a  icJtole,  we  most  see  whether  these  words  are 
consistently  represented  throughout  the  chapter  by  the 
expressions  to  which  Olmstead  draws  attention.  The 
facts  are  as  follows:  jx>v  occurs  five  times  (ver.  3,  8,  10, 
17  bis).  The  second  passage  in  verse  17,  "the  same  is  the 
king's  vale,"  is  an  obvious  gloss  omitted  by  the  Qreek  MS. 
L,  rightly  followed  by  Olmstead.  The  other  Greek  MSS. 
have  ircStoi',  not  iftapay^.  In  three  of  the  other  four  pas- 
sages they  all  have  xotXat.  Thns  the  word  on  which  Olm- 
stead relies  is  not  habitually  nsed  by  the  translator  of  this 
chapter.  It  occurs  only  in  verse  3,  where  g  has  ffaXaatrav. 
How  it  came  into  the  test  I  do  not  at  present  see.  It  may 
be  the  rendering  of  another  translator  which  has  here 
ousted  the  original  Greek  word,  or  it  may  point  to  a  dif- 
ferent Hebrew.  In  any  case  it  does  nothing  to  establish 
a  different  translator  for  the  whole  chapter,  seeing  that 
it  occurs  only  in  one  passage  out  of  an  original  four. 

eoi,  which,  be  it  noted,  is  spelt  defectively  throughout  the 
chapter,  occurs  five  times  (ver.  11,  12, 16  bis,  21).  In  the 
second  occurrence  in  verse  16  it  is  omitted  by  the  Ethiopic, 
bw,  m,  o,  r,  c,.  The  other  MBS.  read  t»  tnrapxovra.  I  think 
the  Ethiopic  is  right,  but  neither  text  helps  Olmstead's 
theory.  In  verse  12  our  Greek  authorities  have  ti/*"  amo-ccvqv, 
which  is  a  perfectly  good  rendering  of  the  Hebrew  and 
does  not  confirm  Olmstead.  On  the  other  hand,  tira-of, 
which  occurs  in  the  other  three  places,  is  not  merely 
unique  as  a  translation  of  the  Massoretic  word;  it  is  im- 
possible. The  Greek  is  here  quite  obviously  following  a 
test  which  bad  3Ti,  chariots,  a  reading  which  differs  only 
in  a  single  letter.  It  is  very  surprising  that  the  LXX 
should  have  found  this,  and  very  important  from  the  his- 
torical point  of  view,  but  the  fact  seems  indubitable. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


6i  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

Olmstead'B  third  word  ie  a  gloss  omitted  by  d  and  the 
pre-Hexaplar  Ethiopic,  as  I  had  pointed  oat  on  page  470 
of  the  BiBUOTHBCA  Sacra  for  July,  1916.  I  think,  how- 
ever, that  Olmstead's  obserratiou  about  Aqnila  shows  ns 
the  origin  of  the  expression.  The  earlier  Greek  text  has 
here  been  patched  from  that  translator  to  bring  it  into 
agreement  with  the  later  Hebrew. 

The  facts,  therefore,  are  totally  unfavorable  to  the  sus- 
picion that  the  whole  of  Gen.  xir.  is  a  late  insertion  in  the 
Greek,  and  so  in  the  Hebrew.  But  they  reveal  some  minor 
glossing  and  one  very  important  variant.  Olmatead  then 
proceeds : — 

"  This  would  well  agree  with  the  '  significant  fact  that  the 
Maccabees  were  called  apxifpm  ^tov  v^wrov  (Jos.  Ant. 
zvi.  163;  Ass.  Hosts  6)  .  .  .  the  frequent  occurrence  of  t'Tf 
as  a  divine  name  in  late  Pss.,  the  name  Balem  in  one  such 
Ps.,  and  Melk  in  (probably)  another'  suggesting  'that  the 
Helk  legend  was  much  in  vogue  about  the  time  of  the  Mac- 
cabees'  (Skinner,  Qenesis,  270 f.)." 

I  think  that  there  will  be  general  agreement  that  the 
exact  probative  force  of  this,  from  the  point  of  view  of  the 
attack  on  Gen.  xiv.,  is  nil.  Certainly  Olmstead  himself 
seems  to  feel  this,  for  he  proceeds:  "In  all  this  uncer- 
tainty one  thing  is  sure."  Then  comes  his  trump  card : — 
"  The  story  was  known  to  Eupolemus  in  142-141  b.c.,  but 
It  was  not  in  this  form.  According  to  him  the  enemy  came 
from  Armenia,  and  it  was  to  this  enemy  and  not  to  the 
king  of  Sodom  that  he  freely  remitted  the  captives.  F^llI^ 
thermore,  the  sacrifice  is  placed  at  the  hieron  of  the  city 
of  Argarizin,  'which  is,  being  interpreted,  the  mountain 
of  the  Most  High'  {Frag.  Hist.  Oraec,  III,  212).  Argar- 
isin  is  without  doubt  Mount  Gerizim.  This  identification 
could  be  explained  as  due  to  Samaritan  infiuence,  and  it 
ia  tme  that  Jos^hus  makes  him  a  Gentile  {Contr.  Ap.,  i. 
2S).  Thus  we  might  save  the  Massoretic  Text,  but  if  we 
do  so,  then  ve  also  condemn  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch 
of  having  been  conformed  to  the  Jewish  after  this  date " 
(pp.  165-166). 

As  a  matter  of  fact  Josepbns  {loe.  dt.)  expressly  says 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Greek  OenetU  66 

that  Eupolemus  could  not  read  the  Hebrev  writings.  There- 
fore there  -are  only  three  altemattTes :  either  he  followed  a 
test  of  the  LXX,  or  a  Greek  tranelation  of  the  Bamarttan, 
or  no  text  at  all.  In  the  third  case  he  will  hare  been 
dependent  on  what  he  learnt  orallj.  Now  when  we  ex- 
amine  the  context  of  these  statementa,  I  do  not  think  that 
an;  doubt  can  be  felt  as  to  the  relation  or  lack  of  rela- 
tion of  his  narrative  to  the  Biblical  text  He  telle  oa 
tliat  Abraham  discovered  astronomy  and  astrology,  went  to 
Phcenicia  and  dwelt  there,  and  by  teaching  the  Phoeni- 
cians certain  astronomical  facts  won  the  favor  of  the  king. 
Then  comes  the  incident  of  the  Armenian  war  against  the 
Phoenicians.  To  my  mind  there  never  was  a  Biblical  text, 
Jewish  or  Bamaritan,  Hebrew  or  Qreefc,  that  related  any- 
thing like  this.  Eupolemus  is,  reproducing  a  mixture  of 
fact  and  legendary  interpretation  based  on  our  Pentateuch 
that  l>ear8  much  the  same  relation  to  history  as  the  Charle- 
magne of  l^end  does  to  the  emperor.  The  mention  of 
Uonnt  Gerizim  shows  that  this  came  through  a  Samaritan 
source.  The  altematiTe  is  to  assume  the  existence  of  a 
Samaritan  Greek  Pentateuch  which  subsequently  to  140 
Bx.  disappeared  without  trace,  or  to  suppose  that  the 
Samaritan  Hebrew  original  was  deliberately  discarded  in 
favor  of  a  later  Jewish  text  which  did  not  support  the 
Samaritan  colt  on  Mount  Gerizim.  Such  a  theory  based 
on  the  authority  of  such  a  tale  as  this  seems  to  me  quits 
nut^able. 

The  attack  on  Gen.  xiv.,  therefore,  breaks  down  com* 
pletely.  With  regard  to  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  ths 
view  Jost  discussed  is  the  "  other  evidence "  pieutioned  in 
the  following  extracts,  which  are  from  Olmstead's  remarks 
on  the  Book  of  Jubilees  and  its  textual  importance: — 
*'A  Jew  of  the  most  undoobted  orthodoxy,  a  stout  defender 
of  the  most  legalistic  faith,  one  in  close  sympathy  with  th* 
Maccabean  royal  house,  had  before  him  a  text  which  was 
very  much  farther  away  from  our  present  Hebrew  than  Is 
that  which  is  today  found  among  the  Samaritans!  Swii 
a  fact,  for  fact  it  undoubtedly  la,  (AiaUengeB  e^dasfltiim. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


66  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

The  most  obrioas  reply  is  that,  in  its  passage  through  the 
Greek,  Latin,  or  Ethiopic  translation,  it  was  corrected  to 
the  Greek  or  to  its  versions,  but  the  most  snperficial  study 
of  the  agreements,  especially  in  its  combinations,  will  show 
this  view  to  be  untenable.  That  the  Massoretic  Text  was 
revised  to  the  Samaritan  is  unthinkable,  scarcely  less  so 
is  the  converse,  yet  this  last  seems  the  only  hypothesis,  and 
there  is  other  evidence  which  fits  with  it "  (p.  161). 

Earlier  (p.  149)  he  had  written:  "The  essential  agree- 
ment between  the  Samaritan  and  the  standard  Hebrew  has 
been  much  adduced  for  apologetic  porposes,  but  the  evi- 
dence is  rapidly  increasing  to  prove  that  its  text  is  late 
{AJSL,  XXXI,  206;  cf.  N.  Bchmidt,  Jour.  Bibl.  Lit. 
XXXIII,  31  ff.;  Wiener,  Bill.  Sacra,  LXXII,  83  ff.)-" 

It  is  to  be  observed  that  the  view  advocated  in  Volume 
XXXI.  is  different  from  his  present  contention.  There  he 
argued  (on  evidence  that  to  my  mind  was  inconclusive) 
that  the  adoption  of  the  Pentateuch  by  the  Samaritans 
was  late.  Here  he  apparently  abandons  the  hypothesis  of 
late  adoption  for  one  of  late  revision.  The  remarks  of 
Bchmidt  are  very  gnarded.  He  concludes  (at  p.  33  of  his 
article)  that  "  it  is  impossible  to  prove  that  the  Samaritan 
Pentateuch  has  remained  the  same  since  it  was  brought  to 
Shechem,  or  that  it  represents  an  earlier  type  than  that 
used  by  G[reek]  in  the  third  century  b.c."  With  regard 
to  my  own  attitude  it  surely  differs  from  Olmstead's.  I 
had  written : — 

"Against  these  views  I  set  the  foUowing  conception  of 
the  history  of  the  text  as  being  in  accordance  with  the 
known  facts.  Hebrew  and  Samaritan  alike  are  descended 
from  the  recension  that  was  in  use  in  the  second  Temple. 
This  represented  a  text  with  very  numerous  comments, 
ritual  and  other.  But  before  the  Samaritan  schism  there 
had  already  come  into  existence  numerous  copies  of  the 
Hebrew,  which  in  many  cases  antedated  the  Temple  com- 
ments and  alterations.  Of  these  the  most  important  for 
our  purposes  were  the  ancestor  or  ancestors  of  the  Egyp- 
tian texts,  the  first  of  which  presumably  dates  from  tite 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Greek  Genesis  57 

time  of  Jeremiah,  and  the  ancestor  of  Jerome's  text,  which 
belongs  to  the  Babylonian-Palestinian  famDy,  but  is  in 
many  respects  purer  than  the  M.T.,  though  it  contains 
some  coiTuptioDS  from  which  the  latter  is  free.  At  the 
same  time,  thronghout  the  earlier  period  there  was  a 
greater  tendency  for  MSS.  of  the  same  family  to  vary,  and 
hence  later  authorities  have  often  preserved  better  read- 
ings where  earlier  witnesses  had  been  affected  many  coi- 
tnries  previously  by  some  corruption  that  ultimatdy  be- 
came widespread.  Thus  it  is  that  we  may  see  the  Vulgate, 
the  '  Hebrew,'  or  any  other  of  the  later  versiona  stepping 
forward  from  time  to  time  with  an  original  reading  that 
has  disappeared  from  M.T.  and  LXX. 

"After  the  Samaritan  schism  the  Temple  text  continued 
to  deteriorate.  Nevertheless  it  was  the  central  text  of  Ja- 
daism,  thon^  formed  and  maintained  on  non-critical  prin> 
ciples,  and  there  was  a  tendency  to  bring  all  other  Jevrish 
-texts  more  or  less  into  conformity  with  it  This  operated 
partly  by  sporadic  changes  and  partly  by  systematic  at- 
tempts, such  as  fixing  of  the  text  by  the  school  of  Aqiba, 
the  elaborate  changes  of  the  scribes  affecting  certain  pas- 
sages, and  the  fresh  renderings  into  Oreefa  and  other  lan- 
guages. 

"At  some  period  in  the  history  of  this  text  (which  was 
formed  on  principles  of  which  we  are  totally  ignorant) ,  a 
single  MS.  mnst  have  acquired  a  dominant  authority  — 
otherwise  how  explain  snch  a  reading  as  that  of  onr 
Hebrew  in  Genesis  Iv.  8?  Bat  the  task  of  bringing  all 
existing  copies  of  the  Bible  throughout  the  wide  Jewish 
diaspora  into  complete  accord  with  a  single  type  of  text 
was  impossible  of  rapid  accomplishment  when  printing 
was  an  unknown  art.  It  took  centuries,  and  minor  varia- 
tions were  inevitably  made  in  the  official  text  during  the 
process.  Fortunately  for  na  there  still  survive  MSS.  (of 
which  we  must  hope  to  have  good  modem  coUations  some 
day)  which  contain  lai^  numbers  of  variants.  StiU  more 
fortunately  Jerome  woi^ed  on  a  Hebrew  original  which 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


68  BiifUctheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

had  often  escaped  the  glosses  of  the  standard  test  with 
the  result  that  bis  rersioD  is  frequently  a  most  valuable 
guide.  Further,  as  the  process  of  assimilating  our  wit- 
nesses to  a  single  type  was  uecessarUy  gradual  and  un- 
equal, it  repeatedly  happens  that  in  many  places  one  witness 
will  preserve  an  earlier  reading  against  all  others.  The 
last  massacre  of  variants  only  came  with  the  final  triumph 
of  the  Massoretes.  At  no  period  in  the  long  history  of  the 
transmission  of  the  text  were  the  principles  applied  such 
as  would  commend  themselves  to  a  scientiflc  textual  critic. 
This  outline  of  the  history  can  be  filled  in  by  further  re- 
search which  will  be  able  to  trace  the  stages  better  by  the 
examination  of  innumerable  agreements  and  differences 
between  the  various  authorities.  The  natural  course  of 
textual  transmission  was  modified  from  time  to  time  by 
theological  and  other  theories  which  swept  across  Jewry 
and  left  their  marks  on  the  Biblical  texts. 

"  If  we  could  assign  a  date  to  the  breaking  off  of  the  Ba> 
maritan  Pentateuch  it  would  lend  precision  to  our  views, 
but  unfortunately  that  is  impossible.  The  arguments  for 
c»rco  330  are  stated  by  Skinner  (Divine  Names,  pp.  11&- 
121),  those  for  432  by  KOnig  (p.  18).  The  weight  of 
historical  documents  appears  to  me  to  be  on  KOnig's  side, 
for  the  Elephantine  papyri  confirm  the  approximate  date 
of  Sanballat  that  may  be  deduced  from  Nehemiab  ziii.,  but 
the  materials  are  too  conflicting  and  nacertain  for  any 
definite  concluBions"  (BS,  Jan.  1915,  pp.  123-125). 

I  think  that  in  this  and  other  portions  of  his  article  01m- 
stead  too  readily  attributes  to  time  what  might  more  justly 
be  ascribed  to  place.  For  instance,  the  Nash  papyrus  in 
Egypt,  some  three  or  four  centuries  after  the  LXX,  has 
readings  that  differ  remarkably:  from  the  Hebrew  and  Ba- 
maritan.  It  does  not  follow  that  the  Samaritan  text  was 
adopted  or  recast  aft«r  the  papyrus  was  written.  Or  take 
Jerome's  remarkable  reading  in  Gen.  xxxi.  24,  to  which  I 
drew  attention  on  pages  140  f.  of  the  Bibuothka  Bacea 
(or  January,  1916,  "  and  be  saw  Ood,"  for  the  Maasoretic 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Greek  Genetta  B0 

"and  God  cam«  to  Laban  the  BTrian."  Unqaeetioiiably 
tfae  Vulgate  has  here  preeerred  an  earlier  tTpe  of  reading 
than  the  Maeaoretic  text,  the  Samaritan,  or  the  IjXX  ;  bat 
nobody  would  dream  of  inferring  that  the  SaraaritanB 
adopted  or  rerised  the  Pentateuch  for  the  Hebrew  in  or 
after  the  fifth  centory  of  the  Christian  era.  I  would  ask 
Olmstead  to  examine  the  variants  from  Hebrew  HSB.  and 
the  Vulgate  that  I  have  been  quoting  for  the  last  few  years 
in  the  Bibuothbca  Sacra  (notably  Oct.  1914  and  Jan. 
1915),  and  Bay  whether  they  do  not  rather  confirm  my  view 
that  the  nniversal  conformation  of  the  Hebrew  texts  to  a 
single  type  was  a  late  result  ensued  only  by  the  labor  of 
centuries.  Similarly  I  cannot  agree  that  the  Vnlgate  is 
hardly  more  than  a  MS.  of  the  current  Hebrew ;  and,  while 
I  believe  that  many  of  its  variations  are  due  to  "  retention 
of  the  Old  Latin  text,"  yet  there  seem  to  me  to  be  others 
which  should  be  attributed  to  a  different  Hebrew  original. 

la  conduBion  I  would  notice  one  other  point  on  which 
I  cannot  accept  Olmstead's  views.  In  dlBcussing  Gen.  xxxi. 
he  quotes  JnbUees:  "Jacob  made  a  feast  for  Laban  and 
for  all  who  came  with  him,  and  Jacob  sware  to  Laban  that 
day  and  Labaa  also  to  Jacob  that  neither  should  cross  the 
mountain  of  Oilead  to  the  other  with  evil  purpose.  And  he 
made  a  heap  there  for  witness,  wherefore  the  name  of  that 
place  is  called  (The  Heap  of  Witness)  after  the  heap." 
His  comment  is  as  follows:  "From  this  we  cannot  dis- 
cover the  exact  text  which  lay  behind  it,  but  evidently  the 
story  was  briefer  and  more  cooBistent  than  the  one  in  our 
present  Oreek.  One  point  at  least  seems  clear,  tiiat  there  was 
no  pillar  in  the  original  story  "  (p.  158).  I  agree  that  we 
cannot  discover  what  text  the  author  of  Jubilees  was  fol- 
lowing, but  the  omission  of  the  pillar  appears  to  me  to  be 
due  to  a  very  different  cause  from  that  assigned  by  Olm- 
stead; viz.  the  influence  of  Deut.  xvi.  22,  "Neither  shalt 
thou  set  thee  up  a  pillar  which  the  Lord  thy  God  hateth." 
Later  Judaism  generally  and  the  writer  of  JubUeea  in  par- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


60  BibUotheoa  Sacra 

ticular  always  tended  to  read  back  current  interpretations 
of  the  texts  of  the  Law  and  to  make  the  earlier  history  con- 
form to  them,  and  we  may  be  sure  that  such  an  author 
would  hare  omitted  the  pillar  for  that  reason.  Indeed,  its 
mention  in  the  Biblical  narrative  may  liave  led  him  to  re- 
gard the  whole  Btory  as  somewhat  unedifying  and  prompted 
its  compression. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE  "  SPLIT  INFINITIVE  "  AND  OTHER  IDIOMS 

HX&BBKT    WILLIAM    HAGOUM,    PH.D. 
CAHBBIDGB,  HABaACHtTBBTtS 

AuiBicA  is  sometimes  called  a  coontry  of  tada.  There 
is  a  certain  amount  of  tmth  in  the  allegation ;  for  we  do 
take  kindly  to  innoTetions,  even  when  they  are  not  only 
no  improvement  on  but  also  when  they  are  positively  in- 
ferior to  what  we  already  have.  We  are  unduly  food  of 
change  and  variety.  It  eeema  to  be  in  the  blood.  Further- 
more, we  are  not  always  as  particular  as  we  might  be  with 
regard  to  the  method  of  obtaining  it.  If  it  is  new  or  "  up 
to  date  "  or  "  the  latest,"  that  suffices.  We  most  have  it. 
We  wish  to  be  known  as  persons  who  are  not  "  behind  the 
times."  Correctness  and  accuracy  are  not  as  important 
in  our  eyes  as  being  right  up  to  the  minute  in  the  newest 
ideas.  We  do  not  question  those  ideas  as  closely  as  we 
ought,  and  we  are  therefore  credited,  on  the  part  of  our 
European  critics,  with  a  degree  of  gullibility  that  is  by  no 
means  flattering.    In  part  we  deserve  it. 

One  of  our  recrait  ideas,  stoutly  maintained  by  Andrew 
Lang,  is  the  notion,  falsely  credited  with  the  support  of 
Thomas  K.  Lounsbury,  that  the  infinitive  is  never  to  be 
"  split,"  meaning  thereby  that  its  "  to  "  is  never  to  be  sep- 
arated from  it  by .  an  adverb.  How  much  mischief  this 
mistaken  doctrine  has  created,  was  not  brought  to  my  at- 
tentioD,  until  a  recent  graduate  of  a  country  high  school 
threw  up  her  hands  in  holy  horror  over  such  an  infinitive 
and  decided  that  its  perpetrator  must  be  an  ignoramus. 
Bhe  could  hardly  have  been  convinced  tliat  the  actual 
ignoramus  was  the  man  who  was  responsible  for  her  views. 
In  reality,  she  belonged  in  the  same  narrow-minded  class 
as  a  worthy  Southern  gentleman  named  Dixon,  who  said, 
late  in  life,  that  he  had  many  sins  to  answer  for,  but  he 
did  thank  the  good  Lord  that  he  had  never  sunk  so  low  a» 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


62  Bibliotheoa  Sacra  [Jan. 

to  vote  the  Republican  ticket!  Comment  is  hardl;  necea- 
Bary, 

While  this  incident  was  etill  fresh  in  m;  mind,  the  editor 
of  The  Boston  Transcript  drew  a  vigorouB  protest  from 
Hon.  John  D.  Long  by  condemning  such  inflnitlTea  in  an 
editorial.  The  protest  was  never  answered,  so  far  as  I  am 
aware.    This  Is  what  he  said: — ■ 

"  Will  you  tell  me  why  in  your  editorial  you  say  that 
the  split  infinitive  is  a  '  grammatical  abomination  '7  Is  the 
outcry  against  it  anything  more  than  a  fad  —  a  conven* 
tional  way  of  sug^eting  that  the  would-be  critic  is  up  in 
his  English?  Why  not  split  the  infinitive  as  well  as  the 
indicative,  which  everybody  does,  as,  for  instance,  Hacau- 
lay  writes  'Berlin  was  again  occupied  by  the  enemy'? 
Would  it  have  been  any  less  elegant  or  clear  to  say  '  the 
eneniy  were  able  to  again  occupy  Berlin,'  so  far  as  the 
split  in&nitive  is  concerned? 

"  Can  you  give  me  the  reason  for  your  objection?  I  can 
find  none  in  the  grammars  or  books  on  rhetoric.  It  is  true 
that  it  is  suggested  there  that  the  split  infinitive  is  not 
used  by  the  best  writers  but  in  the  same  connection  it  is 
admitted  that  it  is  used  by  many  of  them  and  that  this  ose 
is  steadily  iucreasiug.  Also  it  is  said  that  it  is  a  clumsy 
form  of  expression,  but  I  fail  to  see  why  '  To  serve  nobly ' 
is  a  neater  term  than  '  to  nobly  serve.'  Often  in  verse  the 
accent  can  be  made  to  fall  properly  only  by  putting  the 
adverb  between  the  two  words  of  the  infinitive. 

"  Then  there  are  many  cases  in  which  one  must  use  the 
split  infinitive.  A  frigid  su^eets  the  phrase  'I  wish  to 
more  than  thank  yon.'  In  that  phrase  where  else  can  one 
put  the  'more  than'?  The  London  Times  is  pretty  good 
anthority  —  good  as  the  Transcript  —  and  its  editorials 
over  and  over  again  split  the  infinitive.  Here  is  one  of  its 
sentences.  '  N^otiations  are  proceeding  to  further  cement 
trade  relations.'  Where  else  can  you  put  '  further '  ?  If 
before  '  to,'  the  reader  is  uncertain  whether  it  does  not 
modify  'proceeding';  if  after  'cement,'  whether  it  does 
not  modify  '  trade.'  At  least  one  example  of  the  split  in- 
finitive is  found  in  Macaulay,  in  De  Qoincey  and  in  Dr. 
Johnson,  though  its  use  by  them  is  rare,  as  it  is  with  all 
writers,  it  being  more  natural  for  everybody  to  keep  the 
infinitive  together  than  to  divide  it 

"  To  be  sure,  in  some  languages,  like  the  Latin,  the  in- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1M9]  The  "  Split  In)hiitive  "  63 

finitive  is  od«  voM  that  cannot  be  divided,  as  amare,  to 
love ;  and  it  may  be  claimed  that  the  English  infinitive  is 
real];  one  word,  though  made  of  two  words,  and  therefore 
cannot  be  split.  But  the  same  is  true  of  the  Latin  in- 
dicative, as  amavi,  have  loved.  One  of  our  dictionaries 
says  that  the  preposition  '  to '  is  a  part  of  the  infinitive. 
But  in  this  connection  '  to '  is  not  a  preposition ;  it  it 
rather  an  auxiliary,  just  as  '  have  *  la  an  auxiliary  in  the 
perfect  indicative ;  and  '  have '  is  there  Just  as  much  a  part 
of  the  perfect  iodicative  as  '  to '  is  of  the  infinitive. 

"  There  is  nothing  in  the  objection  that  the  use  of  the 
split  infinitive  may  lead  to  careless  or  confused  English. 
No  good  writer  will  ever  use  it  unless  it  fits  in  readily  or 
effectively,  and  a  bad  writer  will  misuse  any  of  the  forms 
of  syntax. 

"  For  myself,  I  split  and  justify  others  in  splitting  the 
infinitive  wherever  it  seems  more  apt  to  do  so,  or  whenever 
better  emphasis  can  be  given  by  so  doing. 

"  I  suggest  that  the  ^^>gresslve8  in  their  next  platform 
put  in  a  plank  in  behalf  of  the  much  abused  split  infini- 
tive" (Boston  Transcript,  Feb.  4,  1913). 
Mr.  Long's  main  position  is  unquestionably  correct.  "  To  " 
is  no  more  a  part  of  the  infinitive  than  "  have "  is  a  part 
of  the  "  perfect  tense,"  and  herein  lies  all  the  trouble  Beal- 
izing  that  fact,  men  are  acting  accordingly. 

Englisb  has  but  two  tenses.  Oothic  had  bnt  two,  —  the 
present  and  the  preterit  or  past.  That  limitation  accounts 
for  the  development  in  Anglo-Saxon  and  in  Oerman  of  the 
modal  phrases  that  now  serve  for  modes  and  tenses  in  Oer- 
man and  English.  English,  however,  has  broken  away  from 
the  ancient  idiom,  and  "  leveling  by  analogy  "  has  been  the 
most  potent  factor  in  the  process.  AU  our  other  so-called 
tenses,  then,  are  merely  substitutes  that  answer  the  pur- 
pose.  They  are  makeshifts  that  have  usurped  the  function 
of  tmse*  in  one  way  or  another.  Some  of  them  are  legiti- 
mate and  some  of  them  are  not.  "  Have  written  "  is  Inti- 
mate ;  bnt  "  have  lost "  and  "  have  gone  "  are  monstrosities. 
They  become  even  worse  when  cmnblned  with  shall  or  will. 
The  purists  swallow  them,  however,  with  never  so  mnch 
as  the  qnlver  of  an  eyelash  and  then  balk  at  "  had  rather 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


61  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

be  "  and  "  had  better  go,"  insisting  that  "  have  lost "  and 
"  have  gone  "  are  "  perfect  tenses  "  and  that  there  can  be 
no  parallel  in  the  premises.  It  is  a  good  way  to  advertise 
their  limitations. 

The  original  idiom  came  from  the  Latin.  A  fev  verbs^ 
especially  habeo  and  teneo,  were  employed  in  a  sort  of  cir- 
cumlocution to  express  fixedness  of  condition  or  finality  of 
purpose.  Thus,  bellum  habuit  indictum,  "  war  he  had,  a 
declared  (one)."  So,  excuaatum  Jtabeas  me  rogo,  "  excused 
have  me,  I  beg."  Likewise,  duces  comprehenaos  tenetis, 
"  the  leaders,  arrested,  you  have-in-your-power."  The  verb 
governed  the  object,  and  the  participle  limited  and  agreed 
with  that  object,  as  the  examples  indicate.  At  times  the 
fact  might  be  obscured.  Thus,  habeo  statutum,  with  a 
clause  covering  the  thing  resolved  upon,  might  seem  like 
an  ordinary  English  "  perfect,"  becanse  that  clause  might 
not  be  recognised  as  a  neuter  substantive  limited  by  statu- 
tum.  Snch,  however,  it  would  be,  and  the  idiom  would 
remain  unctianged.  An  in&ected  tongue  makes  for  sta- 
bility of  that  sort.  English  is  not  inflected,  and  therein 
lies  the  difference. 

Epistolam  habeo  acriptam,  "  a  letter  have  I,  a  written 
{one),"  was  stable  enough  in  Latin,  but  in  English  it  easily 
passed  into  "  I  have  written  a  letter,"  with  the  relationship 
of  the  parts  so  befogged  that  "  have  written  "  came  to  be 
taken  as  a  tense.  It  expressed  the  same  general  idea  as  a 
perfect  and  came  to  be  regarded  as  one.  A  true  tense,  how- 
ever, is  always  a  single  form,  not  a  phrase,  and,  for  that  rea- 
son, we  have  but  two  tenses  in  EDglish.  On  the  basis  of  its 
origin,  then,  "  have  lost "  involves  a  Jlat  contradiction 
(/  poaaeaa  the  thing  that  ia  lost),  while  "have  gone"  con- 
tains an  intransitive  perfect  participle  (7  poaaesa  a  gone 
self)  in  an  idiom  that  really  demands  a  transitive  one 
(/  posseas  a  having  been  made  to  go  self). 

German  and  Anglo-Saxon  are  more  logical.  The  former 
has  Ich  bin  gegangen  and  the  latter,  Ic  eom  geg&n,  "  I  am 
having-gone."    The  relationship  of  the  parts  is  strictly 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  "  Split  Infinitive  "  65 

correct,  the  participle  limiting  the  subject,  and  the  idiom 
is  therefore  sound.  The  English  one  is  anything  but 
sound.  Leveling  by  analogy  has  foisted  a  transitive  con- 
stmction  onto  aU  intransitive  verbs;  but  most  persons,  not 
knowing  this  fact,  are  better  satisfied  with  their  English 
idiom  than  they  are  with  the  German  one.  The  sensible 
thing  to  do,  then,  is  to  let  well-enough  alone.  Indeed,  if 
a  serious  attempt  should  ever  be  made  to  eradicate  anom- 
alies of  that  sort  from  the  English  tongue,  it  would  soon 
appear  that  the  language  itself  cannot  continue  to  exist 
without  them.    It  is  practically  made  up  of  such  things. 

Did  you  ever  analyze  a  compound  tense  to  see  what  an 
auxiliary  verb  really  is ?  "I  will  go "  means,  in  the  last 
analysis,  /  will  a  frotnj/  of  some  sort.  In  other  words, 
"  will "  is  the  verb,  and  "  go  "  is  an  infinitive  used  as  its 
object.  "  I  can  do "  is  somewhat  simUar,  although  the 
situation  is  made  more  complicated  by  ■  the  nature  of 
"  can."  It  is  an  old  preterit  employed  as  a  present.  That 
Is  why  it  makes  no  infinitive  "  to  can."  It  originally  sig- 
nified to  "know,"  hence  (after  getting  the  required  knowl- 
edge) to  "be  able."  Instead  of  saying  "I  have  acquired 
the  necessary  knowledge  as  to  the  doing  of  something," 
we  simply  say  "  I  can  do  it."  The  "  do  "  is  still  an  infini- 
tive ;  but  its  relation  to  the  "  can  "  is  rather  that  of  an 
adverbial  accusative  than  that  of  a  tme  objective,  if  we 
adhere  to  etymological  considerations  as  seems  necessary 
in  the  premises. 

There  are  other  preterit-presents  in  English,  as  may^ 
shall,  and  must.  New  preterits  have  been  developed,  giv- 
ing us  forms  like  "could,"  "should,"  and  "might,"  all  of 
which  are  noteworthy.  Thus,  "  could  "  not  only  has  the 
"  ablaut "  of  a  strong  verb  and  the  -d  of  a  weak  one  but  also 
an  inserted  I  on  the  analogy  of  should  and  would.  Ablaut 
is  a  variation  in  the  root  vowel,  as  in  "  sing,  sang,  sung," 
or  "  sink,  sank,  sunk."  It  is  common  in  Anglo-Saxon  and 
German.  Where  the  same  result  is  obtained  by  the  use  of 
-ed  or  -t,  the  verb  is  a  weak  one,  technically  speaking.  Stem 
Vol  LXXVl.    No.  301.    6 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


66  BibUQiheoa  Sacra  [Jan. 

variation  is  a  Semitic  characteristic.  In  tlie  Aryan  tongues 
tlie  tendency  is  to  eliminate  it,  Hebrew  fairly  revels  in  it. 
In  reality,  it  is  an  indication  tliat  the  two  families  of  lan- 
guages were  once  related,  a  fact  no  longer  denied,  since  it 
may  be  regarded  as  already  established  by  the  labors  of 
Dr.  Drake,  an  American,  and  Professor  M&ller,  a  Dane. 

In  a  single  instance  a  tendency  toward  stem  variation 
has  come  nnder  my  notice.  On  the  analogy  of  "  throw, 
threw,  thrown,"  a  form  "  shew  "  was  developed  in  the  State 
of  Maine  and  was  in  common  use  in  my  boyhood.  As  that 
was  the  original  form  of  the  present,  it  was  very  properly 
condemned  by  lingaists.  Where  e  and  o  are  found  in 
such  connections,  e  is  a  "  middle  "  form  and  o  a  "  strong  " 
one.  The  "  weak  "  form  omits  the  vowel  altogether,  as  in 
yLyv.oftai.  A  similar  phenomenon  is  found  in  noun  stems 
of  the  Aryan  tongues,  as  will  appear  below.  Other  combi- 
nations of  vowels  are  employed  for  the  same  purpose  and 
in  the  same  way. 

Coming  back  now  to  our  auxiliary  verbs,  so-caUed,  it  will 
be  seen  that  they  are  actually  verbs  whose  true  sense  and 
ofBce  have  been  either  obscured  or  forgotten.  They  have 
thus  become  parts  of  verbal  phrases  which  serve  the  pur- 
pose of  modes  and  tenses.  If  we  choose  to  call  them  so,  it 
is  really  misleading,  and  yet  no  philologian  will  be  likely 
to  attwnpt  to  force  an  exact  usage  down  the  throats  of  the 
partly  educated,  because  no  good  purpose  will  be  served 
thereby  and  more  barm  than  good  might  result.  The  pur- 
ists have  furnished  the  philologians  with  so  striking  an 
object  lesson  along  these  lines  that  they  are  not  inclined 
to  incnr  a  similar  liability. 

In  the  light  of  the  above  facts,  the  fight  against  "  had 
rather  "  and  "  had  better  "  seems  puerile.  Both  are  idioms 
with  more  to  Justify  them  than  there  is  to  justify  variooa 
other  things  that  pass  without  question.  They  happen  to 
be  somewhat  singular,  and  the  true  character  of  the  other 
idioms  is  not  known.  As  a  result,  purists  Insist  that  you 
cannot  pane  "  had  .  be,"  while  "  have  lost "  and  "  have 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  "Split  Infinitive"  67 

gone  "  are  "  tenses."  You  cannot  parse  them,  however,  cm 
the  basis  employed  with  "had  .  be,"  and,  although  it  la 
not  necessary,  there  ia  no  more  reason,  intrinsically,  why 
"  had  .  be  "  should  not  be  given  a  place  as  a  tense  than 
there  is  why  "  haTC  gone "  or  "  have  lost "  should  be,  ex- 
cept that  of  insufBcient  knowledge  concerning  the  latter, 
which  is  no  reason  at  all. 

The  real  question  is  one  of  serrice.  Do  expressions  like 
"  had  rather  be  "  and  "  had  better  go  "  fill  a  place  in  Eng- 
lish that  it  is  desirable  to  have  filled?  "Had  rather  be" 
can  be  analysed  and  parsed.  It  means  would  hold  it  pref- 
erable to  be,  which  equals  "would  prefer  to  be."  The 
"had"  is  accordingly  a  Babjauctive  (or  "potential"), 
as  appears  in  "  Had  I  known  that,  I  had  done  differently." 
The  "  be  "  is  therefore  an  inflnitiTe  depending  on  "  had  " 
precisely  as  "  be  "  is  an  iuOuitive  depending  on  "  will "  in 
"  will  be."  The  remaining  word,  "  rather,"  is  an  adjective. 
The  corresponding  idiom,  "  would  rather  be,"  makes  it  an 
adverb,  and  "  had  rather "  has  accordingly  acquired  a 
value  resembling  that  of  the  "  break  in  npon  "  discussed 
below.  It  has  a  forcefulness  that  is  lacking  in  "  would 
rather  "  and  is  therefore  Justified. 

When  it  comes  to  "  had  better  go,"  we  have  no  real  al- 
ternative ;  for  "  would  better  go "  —  even  if  it  does  have 
l>ack  of  it  the  authority  of  Walter  Savage  Landor  —  is 
altf^ther  abominable  and  without  excuse,  in  spite  of  the 
fact  that  it  does  satisfy  the  purists  by  coming  within  the 
bonnds  of  their  parsing  knowledge.  "  Had  better  "  means 
should  hold  it  better  to,  the  "  bad  "  retaining  its  snbjunc- 
tive  ("potential")  character.  It  implies  that  there  is  a 
need  or  duty  which  it  will  be  well  to  meet.  Eivery  speaker 
of  English  feels  the  force  of  it  "Would  better"  utterly 
fails  to  measure  np  to  the  requirements  of  the  situatitm; 
for  it  has  no  snch  content,  and  it  is  not  likely  to  have.  So 
long  as  English  continues  to  owe  much  of  its  richness  and 
flexibility  to  such  idioms  as  these  —  that  it  does  so  now  Is 
a  matter  concerning  which  there  is  no  room  for  a  difference 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


88  Bibliotkeca  Sacra  [Jan. 

of  opinion  —  it  will  be  well  not  to  meddle  nndul;  with 
what  is,  or  has  been,  accepted  usage  in  the  classicB  of  Eng- 
lish literatnre.^ 

It  is  BBtoniBhing  how  narrow  the  viewpoint  really  is 
of  some  of  oar  woold-be  leaders  in  English.  The  use  of 
"  don't "  in  the  third  singnlar,  while  not  strictly  correct, 
Is  jnatifled  by  the  fact  that  it  is  a  development  along  lines 
that  are  coextensive  with  tlie  whole  history  of  the  Aryan 
tongues.  The  entire  Indo-Oermanic  family  of  languages, 
to  which  English  belongs,  is  simply  studded  with  similar 
levelings  by  analogy.  In  Latin  we  have  pSa,  pedis,  bat  in 
Greek  vovr,  vaSJ^,  indicating  that  the  parent  language  prob- 
ably had  po8,  ped,  pd,  in  use  —  an  Avestan  compound  shows 
the  last  —  as  the  strong,  middle,  and  weak  stem  forms, 
although  a  somewhat  different  explanation  has  been  sag- 
gested.  Sanskrit  usage  supports  the  explanation  here 
giv^,  and  so  do  the  English  words,  foot,  feet.  The  leveling 
by  analogy  is  admitted  without  question. 

That  sort  of  thing  is  encountered  everywhere.  The  use 
of  "  you  "  for  "  ye  "  and,  especially,  for  "  thou  "  is  a  case 
in  point.  "  Them  will  go "  would  horri^  us  all,  but  the 
time  was  when  "  you  will  go "  was  quite  as  bad,  and  the 
two  are  actually  parallel  forms  of  expression.  The  use  of 
8ie  in  Oerman  is  similar  but  worse,  if  anything,  although 
it  is  an  established  idiom.  Leveling  by  analogy  accounts 
for  both  anomalous  forms,  and  "  tinkering "  will  not  help 
matters.  It  may  make  them  worse.  The  purists  have  sev- 
eral "  successes  "  of  that  kind  to  their  credit ;  but  thc^  are 
bardly  things  to  be  proud  of. 

Take  the  modem  (New  York)  expression,  "Ave  cents 
the  copy."  It  su^ests  a  high  hat,  a  long  coat,  and  a  thim- 
bleful of  brains.     "  Five  {cents  a  copy "  was  a  perfectly 

■  That  Bucb  Is  tb«  case  wlt^  both  of  these  Idioms  hu  been  duir 
Bbown.  See  American  Journal  ot  Pbllologr,  vol.  il.  pp.  281-323, 
"  On  the  OrlKln  of  '  Had  rather  Qo '  and  Analogous  or  Appareiitl7 
Analogous  Locutions,"  by  Fltzedward  Hall,  or.  if  that  Is  not  avail- 
able, chapter  iz.  of  ProfesBor  Lounsbury's  book  entitled  "The 
Standard  of  Usage  in  English." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  "  Split  Infinitive  "  69 

good  idiom,  and  it  was  correct.  It  meaoB  five  cents  for  one 
(each)  copy,  and  it  applies  to  all  copies  of  the  iaaue. 
"  The  "  necessarily  discriminates.  It  is  a  definite  article, 
and  in  all  lan^ages  that  have  snch  a  word  it  is  a  weak 
demonstrative  (this  or  that) .  "  Five  cents  the  copy  "  may 
accordingly  refer  to  the  copy  that  bears  the  words,  with 
the  possible  intimation  that  no  other  copy  will  have  the 
same  price.  If  the  next  should  happen  to  read  "  six  cents 
the  copy"  no  incongruity  wonld  be  involved,  and  each 
might  vary  the  price  without  doing  violence  to  the  lingnia- 
tic  requirements  of  the  situation.  Moreover,  "  five  cents 
the  copy"  may  mean  five  cents  for  the'copy  (some  partic- 
ular reproduction)  of  this  one,  with  no  reference  to  the 
one  80  marked  or  to  the  issue  as  a  whole. 

Verily,  "  a  little  knowledge  is  a  dangerous  thing."  That 
is  the  trouble  with  most  purists.  Tbey  accordiogly  wish 
either  to  divorce  English  entirely  from  its  historical  con- 
nections and  make  it  a  law  unto  itself  or  else  to  force  it 
to  conform  to  some  etymological  limitation  that  it  has  long 
outgrown.  Ifone  of  their  schemes  are  really  feasible.  If 
they  were,  the  result  mig^t  be  altogether  mischievous.  A 
good  physician  hardly  feels  competent  to  prescribe  for  a 
patient  nntil  he  has  acquired  a  knowledge  of  the  family 
history  of  the  sufferer  with  relation  to  the  diseased  condi- 
tions. The  purists  would  "  doctor "  English  without  any 
such  knowledge  and  without  attempting  to  obtain  it  before 
proceeding  to  business.    That  is  why  th^  are  purists. 

They  are  useful  —  in  a  way.  A  certain  amount  of  prun- 
ing is  desirable,  if  the  fruitful  branches  are  only  let  alone. 
"  Snckers "  need  to  be  removed,  and  language  develops 
that  sort  of  thing  in  the  form  of  slang.  The  trouble  witii 
them  is  this.  Th^  will  not  restrict  their  efforts  to  Inti- 
mate lines  but  must  needs  undertake  to  remodel  the  tree 
itself.  "  Dooming  "  an  aged  apple  tree  is  sometimes  ad- 
visable. It  is  not  advisable  to  attempt  to  d^om  a  lan- 
guage, which  is  about  what  the  purists  would  ultimately 
do  if  they  were  allowed  to  have  their  own  way.    The  result 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


TO  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

uroald  hardly  be  ornamental  or  attractive.  There  is  a  liinit 
to  such  activities. 

For  that  reason,  it  ia  time  to  revolt  when  they  attempt  to 
rob  us  of  the  "  split  infinitive"  It  has  its  place.  "  So  to 
spealt "  is  an  idiom  that  is  often  used.  It  serves  a  useful 
purpose.  It  does  not  mean  to  apeak  m  such  a  monner, 
although  "  to  BO  speak "  does  mean  jnst  that.  A  care- 
ful discriminatioD  is  made  possible  by  the  two  arrange- 
ments. "  So  much  as  to  sug^iest "  is  not  the  same  in  mean- 
iDg  as  "  to  so  much  as  suggest,"  and  the  elimination  of 
second  forms  of  ttiat  kind  destroys  one  of  the  strong  points 
in  English  diction.  That  we  can  do  things  like  that  is  one 
of  the  beauties  of  our  mother  tongue.  The  fight  against  it 
is  already  working  destructively  in  other  directions,  as  will 
appear  shortly.  It  is  a  perfectly  good  construction,  and  a 
literary  one. 

Hr.  Long  mentions  "  to  more  than  thank."  To  it  has 
been  added  "  to  more  than  double."  In  (^position,  It  has 
been  urged  that  you  cannot  parse  "more"  singly  in  this 
pbrase,  any  more  tlian  you  can  "  to,"  and  that  each  word 
is  a  part  of  the  verb,  which  is  a  compound  like  "  pussy* 
foot"  or  "double-cross."  This  has  but  one  weak  spot  — 
it  is  not  true.  The  two  compounds  are  genuine;  for  each 
expresses  a  simple  idea.  "  More  than  double  "  is  complex, 
and  it  is  ellipticaL  It  means  to  do  »om*thing  in  ewces$  of 
■what  one  uioidd  have  done  if  he  had  doubled  the  originaL 
"So  comparison  is  tber^re  possible  in  the  premises.  It  is 
true  that  no  *'do"  is  now  felt  in  the  phrase ;  but  neither 
is  "  house "  felt  in  the  sentence,  "  I  am  going  down  to 
faHier's  for  the  summer."  In  each  case  Hie  missing  word 
b  necessary  before  any  parsing  can  be  done.  Prepositions 
do  not  govern  the  possessive  case  in  English.  They  do 
govern  the  corresponding  genitive  case  in  German,  Oree^ 
and  Sanskrit,  so  far  as  Sanskrit  can  be  said  to  have  such 
a  construction;  but  their  adverbial  origin  still  Aines 
Urougfa  in  places,  especially  in  SaDskrit  English  now 
Includes    several    participles  (excepting,  notwithatanding, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  "8pUt  Infinitive"  71 

eoQcerning,  r^arding,  respecting,  earing),  eome  impera- 
tivea  (except,  Bave),  and  an  adjective  (like)  among  its  pre- 
positioDB ;  bnt  we  may  easily  go  too  far  in  sacti  matters. 

Ab  to  tlie  "  to,"  let  tills  l>e  remembered.  It  belongs  to 
no  true  in&nitlTe,  bnt  is  a  corruption  taken  from  the 
gerund,  which  was  used  as  the  object  of  the  preposition. 
It  has  retained  its  prepositional  force  in  countlesB  in- 
stances, as  paraphrasing  will  show.  "  House  to  let " 
means  a  house  for  letting,  and  the  "  to  let "  parallels  tbe 
other  phrase  in  "  house  for  sale."  Similarly  "  good  to 
eat "  means  good  for  eating,  and  tbe  illustrations  might 
be  mnltiplied  indefinitely.  If  tbe  "  to "  in  the  "  more 
than  doable"  phrase  Indicates  purpose,  it  is  a  genuine 
preposition  still;  for  it  means  in  order  to  and  can  be 
paraphrased  with  "  for "  (for  tbe  purpose  of  more  than 
doubling).  That  the  "for"  idiom  is  not  in  use  makes  no 
difference.  The  only  requirement  is  that  the  construction 
shall  make  sense.  In  case  the  "  to  "  has  lost  its  preposi- 
tional force  (is  merely  a  corruption  from  the  gerund),  it 
is  to  be  parsed  as  the  "  rhematic  sign."  It  has  practically 
dropped  out  of  use  after  various  verbs  once  followed  by  it, 
such  as  bid,  help,  and  make. 

If  "  more  than  "  is  to  be  dealt  with  without  supplying 
the  suppressed  "  do  "  after  the  "  to,"  it  must  be  taken  as 
an  adverbial  element  modifying  "  double."  That  it  changes 
the  meaning  of  tie  verb  does  not  matter.  We  do  that  sort 
of  thing  often  In  English.  "  I  broke  in  upon  his  medita- 
tion "  becomes  in  tbe  passive  "  his  meditation  was  broken 
in  upon  by  me."  Until  such  combinations  are  regarded  as 
compounds,  it  is  certainly  out  of  tbe  question  to  treat 
-  more  than  double  "  as  one.  "  In  upon  "  is  a  part  of  tlie 
verbal  idea,  an  integral  part  of  it,  and  the  words  are  "  post- 
positions  " —  I  have  been  calling  them  such  for  about  forty 
years,  beginning  in  my  Junior  year  in  college  while  teach- 
ing Whitney's  "  Essentials  of  Ehiglish  Grammar,"  the  best 
book  of  the  sort  ever  written  even  If  it  was  too  deep  for 
ordinary  teachers  of  that  grade,  —  which  are  as  much  a 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


72  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

part  of  the  verb  as  the  Beparable  prefixes  are  in.  Qerman 
after  they  have  been  relegated  to  the  end  of  the  sentence. 
"  To  b^in  "  is  anfangen,  to  "  lay  hold  on."  In  the  infini- 
tive we  have  anfangen  or  anssufangen.  The  participle  cor- 
responds. In  other  constructionH,  unless  the  inverted  order 
is  required,  the  "  on  "  goes  to  the  end,  as  in  Ich  fing  dieaen 
Morgen  sehr  friih  zu  schreiben  an,  where  my  early  morn- 
ing writing  is  expressed  with  all  the  words  save  one  be- 
tween the  two  parts  of  the  verb.  The  arrangement  is  com- 
mon and  familiar. 

We  are  unduly  superficial  in  our  parsing.  "  He  made 
note  of  the  fact "  would  be  analyzed  as,  —  a  pronoun,  fol- 
lowed by  a  finite  verb,  which  is  in  tnm  followed  by  an 
object  limited  by  a  prepositional  phrase.  We  fot^t  the 
passive,  "  the  fact  was  made  note  of  by  him."  We  can 
paraphrase  the  verbal  idea  by  "  was  noted,"  and  "  note " 
therefore  becomes  a  complementary  accusative  followed  by 
an  adverbial  particle,  if  we  insist  upon  an  exact  analysis. 
The  idiom  is  justified  by  its  emphasis  of  the  idea  of  noting, 
and  it  is  liliely  to  be  regarded  as  perfectly  good  English 
until  some  purist  gets  tangled  up  in  the  parsing.  "  Made 
note  of  "  is  a  verbal  phrase  which  performs  the  same  func- 
tion as  "  noted."  That,  however,  does  not  prevent  as  from 
saying  "  made  careful  note  of,"  with  an  adjective  in  be- 
tween the  parts. 

The  troth  is  this.  No  verbal  phrase  that  happens  to  do 
duty  as  a  mode  or  a  tense  is  so  much  of  a  unit  that  it  can- 
not be  separated  when  clarity  is  promoted  thereby.  Ex- 
actness often  demands  just  such  a  separation ;  and  yet  the 
agitation  against  the  "  split  infinitive  "  is  reacting  against 
"  split "  teaues,  so  that  they  too  are  beginning  to  be 
avoided.  The  results  are  already  deplorable;  for  the  ex- 
ample of  the  newspapers  is  being  copied  elsewhere.  Note 
these  specimens: — 

"He  warned  registration  officials  that  favoritism  easUy 
could  be  detected  "  (Boston  Jonmal,  Hay  11,  1917,  p.  1, 
near  end). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  "  Split  Infinitive  "  73 

"  Some  influential  meo  of  thie  group  even  have  suggested 
that  Germany  go  so  far,"  etc,  {Ibid.,  May  21,  1917,  p.  7, 
col.  8). 

"  He  asserted  that  the  invention  soon  will  be  demon- 
strated bv  the  government,  which  already  had  been  advised 
of  the  details"  (lb.,  May  23,  1917,  p.  1,  col.  6). 

"  The  sitnation  aa  indicated  in  the  registration  returns 
only  can  result  in  most  careful  action  on  the  part  of  ex- 
emption boards  "  {lb.,  June  8, 1917,  p.  1,  col.  1). 

"  How  much  of  the  burden  of  Russia's  needs  will  be  as- 
sumed by  this  country  yet  is  to  be  determined  "  (Boston 
Transcript,  May  24,  1917,  p.  4,  col.  5). 

"  More  than  10,000  mUes  of  wire  already  has  been  with- 
drawn from  commercial  service"  {lb.,  May  25,  1917,  p.  4, 
col.  4). 

"  Numbers  of  prisoners  are  reported  already  to  be  reach- 
ing the  collecting  Stations  "  (lb.,  June  7,  1917,  p.  3,  col.  2). 

"  He  expressed  the  conviction  that  .  . .  the  fr^om  which 
has  been  achieved  stilt  will  be  cherished"  {lb.,  Julv  14, 
1917.  Part  III.,  p.  6,  col.  4). 

"Yes,  the  world  is  coming  back  to  Ood  and  it  also  is 
«oming  bact  to  Jesus  "  (L.  c,  col.  1,  quoted  from  the  Con- 
gregationaliat). 

"  The  talis  he  recently  has  given  at  forums  .  .  .  have 
deeply  stirred  ...  his  hearers"  (Orinnell  Review,  May, 
1917,  p.  153,  col.  2,  quoted). 

"  Grandsons,  sons,  and  husbands  already  have  been  sac- 
rificed on  the  firing  line"  (G^graphical  Magazine,  April, 
1917,  p.  322). 

"  We  ask  how  a  textual  critic  .  .  .  can  dare  go  to  garble 
this  text"  (Bibliotheca  Sacra,  April,  1918,  p.  286). 
Most  of  these  specimens  were  picked  up  in  a  few  days  at 
random  as  they  thrust  themselves  upon  my  notice.   Then 
t  began  to  invert  the  order  as  I  read. 

That  the  "  split  infinitive  "  was  not  always  observed  and 
duly  eliminated  was  proved  by  an  occasional  example, 
such  as, — 

"  His  successor  would  not  delay  the  solemn  confirmation 
by  the  country  of  the  decision  not  to  in  any  way  divide  the 
activities  and  efforts  of  the  world  democracies"  (Boston 
Journal,  May  18, 1917,  p.  2,  col.  7) . 
Even  the  Boston  Transcript  nodded  now  and  then  as  is 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


74  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

shown  by  a  "  to  So  Assist "  in  a  sabheading  of  the  issue 
of  May  17,  1917  (p.  1,  col.  5).  How  much  of  a  pain  was 
caused  I  cannot  say. 

Kot  content  with  such  achievements,  this  linguistic 
octopus  is  now  encouraging  the  habit  of  avoiding  the  in- 
sertion of  any  adverb  after  the  preposition  "to."  Witness 
the  following: — 

"It  develops  upon  the  government  to  find  ont  just  to 
what  extent  the  party  local  is  allowing  itself  to  be  used 
as  a  point  of  vantage  for  the  German  spy  service"  (Bos- 
ton  Transcript,  June  11,  1917,  p.  10,  col.  3). 

"  In  this  situation  the  Western  Allies  can  look  forward 
only  to  one  possible  solution  —  to  the  prosecution  of  the 
war,"  etc.  (Review  of  Reviews,  March,  1918,  p.  271,  coL  2). 

AU  italics  are  mine.  It  Is  hardly  necessary  to  call  at- 
tention to  the  fact  —  it  is  painfully  evident  —  that  "  sqnint- 
ing  constructions  "  are  here  encouraged. 

This  is  leveling  by  analogy  at  its  worst.  The  starting 
point  is  to  be  found  in  the  habit  of  placing  the  adverb 
before  the  "  to  "  of  an  ipflnitive.  Any  "  to  "  is  now  likely 
to  be  similarly  affected  regardless  of  the  effect  produced. 
Moreover,  the  adverb  is  constantly  placed  before  an  aux- 
iliary verb  instead  of  with  the  word  it  modifies.  Hr. 
Long's  sug^iiestion  is  therefore  being  taken  seriously  but 
in  the  wrong  way.  If  the  examples  were  confined  to  the 
newspapers,  it  would  matter  little.  Unfortunately,  they 
are  rapidly  creeping  into  other  publications,  and  I  cannot 
help  wondering  what  the  end  will  be. 

English  has  been  extremely  flexible,  capable  of  fine  dis- 
tinctions, and  remarkably  expressive.  The  tendencies  here 
noted  may  ultimately  result  in  making  it  stilted,  inac- 
curate, and  stupid.  Possibly  some  of  us,  just  by  way  of 
a  eonnta-  irritant,  ought  to  conscientiously  "  split "  every 
tnftnitive  that  we  conveniently  can.  In  order  to  help  in 
overcoming  tfaia  inane  and  misdirected  effort.  In  the  en- 
deavor to  write  elegant  English  —  by  avoiding  "  split  in- 
finitive* "  — these  good  people,  whose  seal  far  exceeds  their 


dlyGOOt^lC 


1919]  The  "  Split  Infinitive  "  75 

knowledge,  are  foifiting  upon  ua  Bnglish  that  i«  oot  merelf 
iael^aot  but  actaally  hideoos. 

When  Latin  became  eet  in  form  it  died.  In  its  place 
arose  Freocti  and  Portuguese  and  Spanish  and  Italian  and 
Provencal.  When  the  purists  finally  succeed  in  getting 
English  into  a  set  form  it  too  witl  die.  What  will  take  its 
place?  The  patois  of  the  street  and  the  slang  of  the  col- 
lege "  dorm."  When  the  effort  to  keep  our  music  "  class- 
ical "  had  made  it  artificial  and  evidently  "  manufactured," 
the  inevitable  reaction  took  place  and  "  rag  time "  came 
into  its  own.  It  did  not  confine  itself  to  the  circles  of  tbe 
uneducated  but  grasped  college  men  and  college  women 
likewise.  Wanting  something  real,  the;  took  that.  It  was 
more  genuine  than  the  music  made  by  rule.  It  had  the 
virtue  of  spontaneity,  and  they  liked  it  for  that  reason. 
The  "  split  infinitive  "  has  that  same  virtue.  To  avoid  it 
is  to  be  artificial.  Making  language  by  rule  is  like  putting 
a  strait- jacket  on  a  sane  person,  — it  serves  do  useful 
purpose. 

As  a  written  tongue  Latin  survived  for  centuries,  though 
it  had  ceased  to  be  spoken  except  in  monasteries  and  sim- 
ilar places.  A  similar  fate  may  overtake  English,  if  it 
becomes  sufficiently  stilted.  Nature  will  attend  to  that. 
Tendenciee  in  these  directions  are  even  now  manifest;  for 
cdloquial  English  and  literary  Ehiglish  are  already  dif- 
ferent things,  and  the  breach  is  widening.  Why  should 
we  help  it  by  eepouslng  a  fad? 

Every  teacher  of  English  seems  to  have  some  pet  notion 
or  some  pet  aversion.  One  professor  in  a  well-known  in- 
stitution insists  npon  having  a  noun  after  all  demonstra- 
tives. What  becomes  of  their  pronominal  character  on 
such  a  basis  ?  He  likewise  has  a  holy  horror  of  a  sentence 
banning  with  ^And."  What  would  be  do  with  the  Eng- 
lish Bible?  Another  cannot  abide  "at  all."  It  is  doubt- 
less overworked;  but  it  does  serve  a  useful  purpose  at 
times.  Why  not  let  it  alone?  Professor  Lonnsbury  ap- 
poreatly  disliked  a  "split  infinitive";  but  be  d^ends  it 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


76  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

in  the  eighth  chapter  of  hia  "  Standard  Usage  in  English." 
Borne  of  the  rest  of  us  dislike  the  unintentional  and  wholly 
unexpected  results  of  bis  antipathy. 

Beyond  a  peradventare  he  was  an  admirable  teacher, 
and  his  book  deserves  the  indorsement  of  scholars  and 
laymen  alike.  And  yet,  aa  a  popular  American  philoso- 
pher, under  the  sobriquet,  Josh  Billings,  reminds  us, 
*'  Every  man's  gut  sometbin'  to  him  that  Bpilee  him."  We 
need  to  remember  that.  Professor  Lonnsbury  set  an  on- 
fortunate  example.  He  was  innocent  enough,  and  his 
teachings  were  sound ;  but  he  wrote  ou  page  39,  "  he  was 
almost  invariably  wrong  whenever  it  was  possible  so  to 
be,"  which  means  torong  to  be.  He  undoubtedly  copied  the 
Anglo-Saxon  idiom ;  for  inverting  the  order  did  not  elimi* 
nate  a  monosyllabic  ending,  and  obscuring  the  character 
of  the  ending  by  not  allowing  "so"  to  be  final,  would 
have  been  mere  camouflage.  The  inverted  order  evidently 
pleased  hia  fancy;  for  we  find  on  page  60,  "  if  so  we  choose 
to  call  them,"  with  no  r^ard  whatever  for  the  idiomatic 
use  of  "  if  so  "  in  other  connections,' 

Perhaps  I  ought  to  say  that  I  am  not  a  teacher  of  Eng- 
lish and  have  not  been  for  some  decades.  I  did  teach  it 
incidentally  for  aix  years  before  going  to  the  Johns  Hop- 
kins University  for  my  postgraduate  work.  Since  then 
my  teaching  has  included  Greek,  Latin,  and  Sanskrit,  witii 
a  brief  substitution  in  German;  but  English  has  been  a 
means,  not  an  end.    That  may  not  have  been  a  detriment ; 

■  Two  other  Items  may  be  mentioned  Incidentally.  On  page  1S9 
a  rooBt  curlouB  slip  In  the  use  of  "would"  and  "should"  —  Bocta 
thlagB  are  common  —  occura,  the  two  being  Interchaoged,  and  on 
page  142  a  prominent  writer  Is  taken  to  task  for  using  the  expres- 
sion "  setting  ben."  As  the  ben  incuhates  the  eggs  and  hatches 
chickens,  the  tpradtgefUl  of  the  tanner  Is  sound,  the  Century  Dic- 
tionary to  the  contrary  notwithstanding;  for  the  Intransitive  verb 
"Bit"  Is  quite  Inadequate  to  express  what  the  ben  actually  does. 
She  Is  not  "sitting"  In  any  true  sense  of  that  word:  sbe  Is  hatcJi- 
ing  chickent,  and  "  setting  "  Is  employed  to  indicate  that  fact.  Tha 
expression  "sitting  ben"  la  really  too  pedantic  for  a  red-blooded 
person  to  tolerate. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  "  Split  Infinitive  "  IT 

for  those  vbo  go  to  Europe  to  learn  French  (or  Qerman) 
do  not  leam  it,  while  those  who  go  there  to  leam  eome- 
thing  else  always  do.  They  are  compelled  to.  PosBibly 
it  may  bare  been  something  of  that  sort  which  made  Pro- 
fessor Gildersleeve  snch  a  master  of  the  English  tougne. 
I  have  never  met  his  equal  and  do  not  expect  to.  He  had 
already  become  one  of  the  world's  great  scholars  in  Greek 
and  had  been  recognized  as  snch  when  1  became  his  sta- 
dent.  It  puzzled  me  then  that  a  man  of  his  acumen  and 
infallible  judgment  should  never  have  a  good  word  for  a 
purist.    I  understand  it  now. 

Language  is  not  a  thing  to  be  shaped  as  a  carpenter 
shapes  wood  with  his  tools.  It  is  rather  a  growth,  to  be- 
pmned  where  necessary,  to  be  cultivated,  and  to  be  allowed 
a  fair  chance  to  be  a  normal  product  of  nature.  When  a 
useful  purpose  is  served  by  some  innovation  —  I  notice 
that  the  expression  "  where  he  is  at "  is  gaining  a  foothold 
in  colloquial  speech,  —  it  should  be  given  a  chance.  If  it 
serves  no  useful  purpose  and  ultimately  involves  a  posi- 
tive detrimait,  as  the  agitation  against  "  split  infinitives  " 
has  plainly  done,  it  cannot  be  repudiated  with  too  great 
haste  or  ^nphasis. 

The  fact  that  German  eu  always  immediately  precedes 
its  infinitive  should  have  no  infiaeuce  in  English.  Their- 
curious  inverted  way  of  putting  things  favors  snch  an 
arrangement  in  German.  In  both  languages  the  force  of 
the  "  to  "  is  more  or  less  obscure,  because  it  was  not  orig- 
inally a  part  of  the  infinitive,  having  been  borrowed  from 
the  gerund.  Both  constmctions  were  employed  in  Anglo- 
Saxon  to  express  purpose.  Thus,  we  find  gritan  e6de,  "  to 
greet  went,"  with  an  infinitive,  but  Ht  eCde  ae  aadere  t6 
t&weime,  "out  went  the  sower  to  sow"  (Mark  iv.  3),  with 
the  gerund.'  English  now  uses  "  to  "  or  "  in  order  to  "  in 
snch  connections,  while  German  employs  vm  su.    The  lat- 

'Tlie  limltatlonB  of  iii[>den)  fonts  sometlmea  prevent  dlBtlnctions 
from  belns  observed,  and  the  tieiere  therefore  lacks  Its  caret  over 
the  diphthong.    It  should  be  long. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


78  Bibtiotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

ter  oloaely  parallels  our  obsolete  "  for  to  "  (ancieotlf  some- 
timea  spelled  "(orto");  bat  the  conBtrnction  was  not 
limited  to  expressions  of  purpose  in  En^ish. 

The  natural  place  for  "  to  "  or  any  other  prepoaition  is 
immediately  before  its  sabstantive,  whether  that  sabstan- 
tive  is  a  noun  or  an  infinitive;  and  yet,  provided  the  re- 
strictions of  Mandarin  English  do  not  constrain  as  tq 
employ  the  word  "attaid,"  we  are  liable  at  any  time  to 
say  snch  thingB  as,  "  did  he  come  to  your  brother's  recent 
birthday  party?"  In  German  we  find  an  idiom  that  is 
even  more  remarkable ;  for  the  prepositions  um,  ohne,  and 
atatt  {anatatt)  may  be  widely  separated  from  the  infini- 
tives—  the  zu  is  retained  —  which  they  govern.  Whitney 
furnishes  this  illustration,  anatatt  aber  die  hiedurch  er- 
zeugte  giinatige  Btimmwig  xu  henuteen,  '  instead,  however, 
of  improving  the  favorable  state  of  mind  thus  brought 
abont.'  Incidentally,  it  may  be  mentioned  that  the  rules 
governing  the  Qerman  and  English  conetmctiona  in  this 
example  can  no  more  be  interchanged  than  can  the  order 
of  the  words,  even  if  Whitney  has  labded  forma  such 
as  "  improving "  is  in  this  connection  "  participial  infini- 
tives "  or  infinitives  in  -ing.  He  avoided  calling  them 
gerunds  —  that  is  what  they  are  —  lest  the  term  be  found 
forbidding  and  unnecessary. 

The  "  split  infinitive "  is  comparatively  rare  for  the 
same  reason  that  these  other  constmctions  are  compara- 
tively rare;  namely,  the  need  does  not  often  occur.  Wh^ 
it  does  occur,  there  should  be  no  hesitation  about  using  It. 
Clarity  is  of  the  first  importance.  To  make  an  artificial 
rule  excluding  such  infinitives  altogether  because  they 
happen  to  be  rare  is  like  promulgating  a  law  that  all  or- 
chids shoold  be  exterminated  because  there  are  but  tew  of 
them.  If  one  procedure  runs  counter  to  the  dictates  of 
common  sense,  the  other  ia  no  better. 

The  power  and  beatity  of  a  language  do  not  dqiend  on 
its  observance  of  a  set  list  of  rules,  precisely  as  the  beauty 
and  attractiveness  of  a  musical  composition  do  not  depend 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  "  Split  Infinitwe  "  79 

OD  a  Blavish  observance  of  the  laws  of  conuterpomt.  As 
a  matter  of  fact  all  great  composers  break  thoee  laws  at 
one  time  or  another,  and  their  power  depends  in  part  upon 
their  occasional  transgressions.  A  timid  sool  would  not 
dare  tranegresB,  and  his  mnaic  is  artificial  and  stilted  in 
consequence.  A  similar  fate  overtakes  the  timid  soul  who 
dares  not "  split "  an  infinitive,  because  it  has  been  declared 
that  it  is  not  "  good  form  "  to  do  so.  If  the  resulting  0c- 
pedients  are  not  "  bad  form,"  it  is  dHBcnlt  to  classify  them. 

English  "  to "  is  really  under  no  more  obligation  to  im- 
mediately precede  its  infinitive  than  is  Greek  dw-~aa 
nntranslatable  word  indicating  contingency  —  under  obli- 
gation to  always  precede  its  verbal  form.  With  the  Sub- 
junctive it  is  regularly  joined  to,  or  compounded  with, 
the  introductory  relative  or  particle,  with  the  Optative  it 
is  more  or  less  mobile,  with  the  Indicative  (secondary 
tenses  and  future)  it  is  likewise  mobile;  but  with  the  in- 
finitive and  participle  it  usually,  not  always,  precedes  or 
follows  itB  word.  Clearness  of  meaning  settles  that  point. 
Language  is  a  means  to  an  end,  not  an  end  in  itself.  Isoc- 
rates  made  it  an  end,  and  no  one  pays  any  attention  to 
what  he  said.  They  are  too  busy  noticing  how  he  said  it. 
Thucydides  is  read  for  what  he  has  to  say;  for  he  says  it 
with  telling  effect  even  if  he  does  shock  the  grammatical 
idealist  in  almost  every  line.  Purists  are  apt  to  be  dis- 
ciples of  Isocrates.  They  lack  breadth  of  vision  and  sound- 
ness of  practical  judgment. 

Fortunately  this  matter  has  been  carefully  threshed  out 
by  Fitzedvard  Hall  in  The  American  Journal  of  Philology, 
vol.  iii.  pp.  17-24,  "  On  the  Separation,  by  a  Word  or  Words, 
of  To  and  the  Infinitive  Mood."  Professor  Lounsbury  in 
bis  eighth  chapter  adds  still  more  material.  It  is  thus 
brought  to  light  that  such  authors  as  Henry  More,  Sir 
Thomas  Browne,  Samuel  Pepys,  Bichard  Bentley,  Detoe, 
Franklin,  Edmund  Bnrke,  Dr.  Johnson,  Madame  D'Arblay, 
Bobert  Bums,  Souths,  Keats,  Ooleridge,  Lord  Byron, 
Charlea  Lamb,  William  Taylor,  Wordsworth,  Lord  Ma- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


80  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

caulay,  De  Qoincey,  Herbert  Spencer,  Matthew  Arnold, 
John  Buskin,  Charles  Beade,  and  Robert  Brovning  have 
made  nee  of  the  conetrnction  from  one  to  many  times,  and 
the  idiom  has  been  traced  back  as  far  as  Wydif  in  the 
fourteenth  century.  The  most  remarkable  cases  are  very 
old.  Some  of  them  have  as  many  as  five  words  between 
the  "  to  "  and  the  infinitive  proper. 

Kow,  it  happens  that  the  Gothic  potisessed  and  used  a 
true  infinitive,  while  Anglo-Saxon  sometimes  sabstituted 
for  such  an  infinitive  a  gerund  with  t6.  The  difTerence 
between  the  forms  came  to  be  overlooked,  although  the 
gerund  was  properly  a  dative,  the  infinitive  being  prevail- 
ingly an  accusative.  At  times  it  borrowed  the  t6  and  be- 
came, in  effect,  itself  a  dative;  for  its  construction  here, 
as  elsewhere,  was  that  of  a  neuter  nonn.  It  naturally 
showed  the  inverted  order,  as  that  was  common  in  the  lan- 
guage. "  To  do  well "  might  be  an  infinitive  {wel  ddn)  or 
a  gerund  {wel  id  d6nne),  the  latter  being  found  in  Mat- 
thew zii.  12,  where  the  whole  phrase  becomes  the  subject 
of  a  verb  and  therefore  to  all  intents  and  purposes  a  nom- 
inative. With  nouns  and  adjectives,  the  gerund  was  the 
proper  form  to  use ;  but  in  English  all  |Such  distinctions 
have  disappeared  along  with  the  inverted  order.  Why 
attempt  to  restore  the  latter,  when  to  do  so  is  simply  to 
lend  confusion  to  forms  of  expression  that  would  other- 
wise be  clear  and  devoid  of  any  possible  "  squint." 

It  is  a  question  of  the  greater  outweighing  the  less'.  On 
that  basis,  the  anomalous  English  "  tenses  "  can  be  justi- 
fied. They  are  needed.  So  can  the  "  had  rather  "  of  Shake- 
speare and  the  English  Bible  —  see  Psalms  Ixxxiv,  10  and 
1  Cor.  xiv.  19  (any  version)  — be  justified,  along  with  the 
"  had  better  "  that  parallels  it  but  la  less  common.  No  one 
seems  to  have  assailed  "  had  to  go  "  as  yet,  but  it  is  slated 
for  attack  as  soon  as  some  purist  discovers  its  limitations. 
It  resembles  "  had  better "  in  a  way ;  for  each  implies  an 
owing  (ought),  and  the  "had"  Is  therefore  peculiar  and 
not  to  be  confounded  with  an  ordinary  auxiliary  verb. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1910]  The  "  Split  Infinitive  "  81 

Each  ie  as  different  from  an  ordinary  "  liad  "  as  the  second 
"  do  "  is  different  Irom  the  first  in  "  how  do  joti  do?  " 

Any  pectiliarity  of  usage  is  an  idiom,  vhich  amounts  to 
saying  that  it  is  a  construction  that  is  more  or  less  idiotic 
—  the  two  words  go  back  to  the  same  Greek  basic  .form, 
which  in  turn  reverts  to  the  idea  of  individual  idiosyncrasy 
or  individual  possession,  i.e.,  it  applies  to  something  that 
is  "  private "  or  "  personal "  in  character,  —  and  if  the 
construction  is  a  trifle  more  idiotic  in  some  instances, 
utility  may  serve  aa  a  Intimate  excuse  for  its  retention. 
On  this  basis,  "  have  lost "  becomes  secure, 

Scholars  who  know  the  weaknesses  of  English  best,  have 
most  patience  with  those  of -ite  idioms  that  are  anathema 
to  the  purists.  They  cannot  see  that  the  pot  has  any  par- 
ticular advantage  over  the  kettle  in  the  matter  of  black- 
ness. If  "  had  better  "  is  idiotic,  then  "  would  better  "  is 
more  idiotic,  and  we  had  better  let  well-enough  alone. 
Even  the  double  negative  has  some  justidcatio? ;  for  it  is 
the  proper  construction  in  Greek,  and  such  forms  are  there- 
fore germane  to  the  Aryan  family  of  languages.  They  have 
not  been  stamped  out  of  colloquial  English  and  probably 
never  can  be.  We  try  to  get  rid  of  them  on  the  basis  of 
logic;  but  l<^c  and  grammar  have  never  been  on  good 
terms.  When  a  man  buys  a  yoke  of  oxen,  he  buys,  logi- 
cally, the  oxen.  Grammatically,  he  buys  the  yoke.  It  may- 
be well  not  to  mix  things  that  differ. 

"  Had  as  lief  "  may  occur  to  some.  It  means  tcould  hoW 
it  aa  good  to;  for  the  "  had  "  is  of  the  same  sort  as  the  oth- 
ers. "  Had  to  go  "  may  mean  held  it  best  to  go;  but  its. 
genesis  is  not  so  clear  as  might  be  desirable.  The  genesis 
of  some  other  things  is  clear  enough;  for  the  restoration 
of  the  inverted  order  is  eliminating  a  legitimate  arrange- 
ment with  the  adverb  after  the  infinitive.  The  Review  of 
Reviews  for  April,  1918  (p.  374,  end),  illustrates  the  point 
with,  "  this  leaves  the  French  with  more  than  two-thirds 
of  the  line  still  to  look  out  for."  Does  Mr.  Simonds  mean 
"  leaves  still "  or  "  look  out  for  still "  ?  The  supposition 
Tol.  LXXVI.    Mo.  301.    6 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


82  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

18  that  he  means  the  latter.  Why  not  say  it  and  avoid  the 
"sqnint"? 

One  other  point  might  be  made;  for  if  it  is  sensible  to 
insist  that  no  adverb  shall  be  allowed  to  come  between  a 
"to"  and  its  infinitive  —  it  always  belongs  to  the  infini- 
tive and  never  to  the  "  to,"  as  even  the  dalleat  must  appre- 
hend,—  then  it  is  also  sensible  to  insist  that  no  adverb 
shall  be  allowed  to  come  between  a  subject  and  its  verb, 
since  the  two  are  inseparably  connected  in  thought  and 
ought  not  to  have  such  an  element  between  them.  On  soch 
a  basis,  forms  like  those  cited  above,  in  which  the  so-called 
tenses  are  kept  intact,  at  once  become  inadmissible,  and 
the  restriction  is  certainly  more  desirable  than  the  present 
avoidance  of  "  splitting  tenses "  ever  can  be,  with  its 
"sqnintinf^  constructions"  and  other  abominations.  As 
a  matter  of  fact,  either  restriction  merely  registers  a  bit 
of  stupidity,  and  it  should  therefore  be  avoided.  As  a  role, 
it  is  well  to  keep  adverbs  in  the  latter  part  of  the  sentence 
and  not  allow  them  to  come  between  the  verb  and  its  sub- 
ject; but  there  are  times  and  places  in  which  linguistic 
exigencies  completely  nullify  any  such  limitation.  Com- 
mon sense  should  make  that  evident.  Unfortunately,  our 
educators  have  not  yet  perfected  a  method  for  developing 
that  most  desirable  faculty. 

The  logic  of  the  situation  is  this.  The  "  split  infinitive  " 
has  been  in  good  and  regular  standing  in  English  for  at 
least  five  hundred  years  and  probably  much  longer  than 
that,  its  most  remarkable  examples  being  very  old.  It  is 
therefore  a  perfectly  sound  and  legitimate  construction 
whenever  and  wherever  clarity  is  to  be  gained  by  its  use. 
The  opposition  to  it  is  based  on  ignorance  of  the  origin  of 
the  idiom  and  a  false  notion  that  "  to  "  is  an  integral  part 
of  the  infinitive,  which  is  clearly  absurd ;  for  it  is  the  re- 
sult of  a  corruption,  and  the  language  contains  countless 
other  infinitives  without  any  "  to,"  in  its  "  tenses,"  and 
likewise  many  forms  in  which  the  "  to "  retains  its  full 
force  as  a  preposition.    Such  forms  are  properly  gemnda; 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1019]  The  "Split  Jnfinitipe"  83 

but  Ehiglish  grammar  does  not  recognize  the  fact,  and  the 
purists  do  not  know  it.  This  much  may  be  regarded  as  set- 
tled b;  the  historical  data  in  our  possession. 

For  the  rest,  let  this  snfBce.  I^ajiguage  is  a  tool,  or  iu- 
stroment,  for  the  transmission  of  thought.  It  is  not  an 
end  in  itself,  and  men  were  not  made  to  be  its  servants. 
Exactness  and  clarity  in  the  expression  of  an  idea  is  the 
supreme  consideration,  and  where  th^  can  be  obtained 
best  by  "  splitting  "  the  infinitive  it  shoold  be  "  split "  re- 
gardless of  the  protests  of  purists.  Like  the  impecunious, 
they  are  always  with  us  and  sometimes  become  a  bar- 
den  to  the  community.  Furthermore,  compound  "  tenses  " 
should  be  "  split,"  in  the  same  fashion,  as  often  as  may  be 
desirable;  and  the  adverb  should  be  placed  with  the  verb 
to  which  it  really  belongs,  not  thrust  in  before  an  auxil- 
iary, to  which  it  does  not  and  cannot  belong,  under  the 
mistaken  notion  ttiat  the  said  auxiliary  is  an  inseparable 
part  of  a  verbal  tense.  If  a  person  is  ignorant  of  the  his- 
tory and  genius  of  our  mother  tongue,  it  may  be  just  as 
well  not  to  advertise  the  fact  with  undue  prominence. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


GERMAN  MORAL  ABNORMALITY 

THE  BBVBBBND  W.  H.  GRIFFITH  THOMAS,  D.l>. 
WrCLlFFH   COLLBOB,  TOBONTO 

During  the  last  four  years  it  has  been  impoBsible  to 
avoid  noticing  many  surprising  ntterances,  and  many  Btill 
more  anrpriBing  deeds,  which  have  emanated  from  German 
sonrces.  Quite  apart  from  what  may  be  perhaps  regarded 
as  political  and  patriotic  prejudices,  these  words  and 
actions  inevitably  demand  an  explanation.  We  have  been 
accustomed  to  thinlc  of  Germany  as  thorougtily  educated 
and  civilized,  possessing  a  respect  for  the  ordinary  moral 
code  of  humanity,  but  in  the  face  of  many  patrait  viola- 
tions of  civilized  ethics  an  inquiry  into  the  cause  of  this 
aberration  is  at  once  natnral  and  esseotial.  In  this  article, 
care  will  be  taken  to  limit  attention  to  utterances  and 
acts  of  the  truth  of  which  there  is  no  serious  question. 
They  are  all  based  on  authority  which  ia  sufficient,  even 
if  not  absolutely  undoubted.  The  words  and  deeds  of 
military  authorities  will  come  first,  and  then  it  will  be 
necessary  to  proceed  to  the  consideration  of  expressions 
of  opinion  by  German  preachers  and  teachers.  The  war 
has  compelled  the  world  to  face  a  moral  abnormality 
which  imperatively  needs  explanation.^ 


The  general  mOitary  policy  of  Germany  calls  for  atten- 
tion first  of  all.  This  may  be  summed  up  by  saying  it  has 
included  the  outrage  and  murder  of  women  and  children, 
not  as  the  excesses  of  an  army  which  has  become  undis- 
ciplined, but  as  part  of  a  definite  scheme  laid  down  by  the 
higher  command  of  that  army.  Then,  too,  there  has  been 
'  This  Inquli?  lias  a  practical  bearing  on  certain  aspects  of 
teaching  which  are  prevalent  to-da)'.  The  dlscusBion  Is  therefore 
unaffected  by  the  recent  events  which  have  brought  about  so  wel- 
come a  cessation  of  hostilities.  The  problem  la  still  of  pressing 
and.  Indeed,  of  permanent  Interest  and  Importance. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Oerman  Moral  Abnormality  85 

the  destruction  of  merchant  sbipping  without  discrimina- 
tion; the  creation  of  a  nev  law  of  the  sea  in  which  there 
is  no  indication  or  even  profession  of  equity  and  justice; 
the  slavery  of  unoffending  civilians  in  occupied  territory; 
the  poisoning  of  wells ;  the  devaBtation  of  evacuated  terri- 
tory without  military  justification;  the  torpedoing  of 
hospital  ships,  notwithstanding  moral  pledges  to  regard 
them  as  inviolate;  the  destruction  of  monuments  of  great 
value;  and  the  holding  of  treaties  and  promises  in  su- 
preme contempt.  These  and  other  things  have  been  part 
of  the  Prussian  military  policy  during  this  war.  An  Officer 
who  has  had  personal  experience  has  su^ested  that  a 
complete  exhibition  of  the  German  war-outfit  should  oc- 
cupy one  of  the  anterooms  of  the  hall  in  which  the  peace 
negotiations  are  held.  This  is  how  be  describes  what  be 
has  seen  and  known : — 

"  It  would  begin  with  the  oil-sprayers  and  incendiary 
tabloids  which  proved  so  useful  in  the  organized  burning 
out  of  the  Belgian  towns,  and  end  with  the  flammenwerfer, 
which  is  designed  to  spray  burning  oil  into  the  eyes,  and 
the  'lachrymatory  Hhells '  which  are  mostly  used  on  the 
Tillages  in  the  rear  of  the  fighting  line,  and  therefore  find 
most  of  their  victims  among  the  civil  population.  The 
flammenwerfer  is  designed  to  spray  the  face  of  the  soldier 
with  burning  oil.  But  its  intention  is  far  more  devilish 
than  its  performance.  Protection  against  it  is  a  very  sim- 
ple matter;  for  the  spray  of  the  burning  oil  cannot  be  got 
to  describe  a  curve  downwards  as  a  jet  of  water  does ;  the 
spray  curves  upward,  and,  if  you  '  lay  low '  like  Brer  Rab- 
bit, it  passes  harmlessly  overhead.  The  poison  gas  clouds 
are  dischan^  from  cylindera  when  the  wind  is  favorable, 
with  the  idea  of  polsooing  the  combatants  on  the  other 
side.  The  Oerman  used  at  first  chlorine;  then  a  variety  of 
gases,  such  as  Phosgene.  He  is  very  cunning  in  mixing 
bin  eases.  With  poison  gan  he  will  send  out  a  stink  gas 
which  is  harmless  though  unpleasant.  It  goes  through  the 
helmet,  and  brings  Germany  right  home  to  the  nostrils, 
and,  if  you  have  not  been  fore-warned,  makes  you  think 
that  your  gas  helmet  ia  leaking.  Take  it  off,  though,  and 
you  are  the  next  on  the  casualty  list,  for  the  poison  gas 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


86  BibUotheoa  Sacra  [Jan. 

geta  to  the  lungs.  Stiak  gaa  the  soldier  must  learn  to  put 
np  with." 

Another  Ulostration  of  the  same  general  attitude  ma; 
be  seen  from  the  article  published  in  the  Berlin  Tageszei- 
tung  in  reference  to  the  confiscation  of  German  ships  in 
Allied  ports.    The  writer  said : — 

"  If  we  are  in  a  position  to  destroy  the  whole  of  London 
it  would  be  moro  humane  to  do  so  than  to  allow  one  mora 
German  to  bleed  to  death  on  the  battlefield.  To  hesitate 
or  to  surrender  ourselves  to  feelings  of  pity  would  be  on- 
pardonable.  More  than  400  merchant  ships  hare  been 
stolen  from  us  by  Great  Britain.  Onr  answer  should  be 
that  for  every  German  ship  at  least  one  English  town 
should  be  reduced  to  mins  by  our  airmen.  Far  better 
were  it  for  ns.that  Great  Britain,  France  and  the  United 
States  should  call  ns  barbarians  tiian  that  they  should  be- 
stow on  ns  their  pity  when  we  aro  beaten.  Softness  and 
sentimentality  are  stupid  in  wartime." 


Acts  of  cruelty  which  have  been  abundantly  evident  all 
through  the  four  years  of  war  constitute  another  moral 
problem.  Lord  Bryce's  reports  on  Belgium  and  Armenia 
bear  their  own  sad  and  impresBive  testimony,  and  the  de- 
plorable treatment  meted  out  to  prisoners,  especially  Brit- 
ish and  Bnssian,  is  beyond  doubt  or  even  question.  But  it 
will  be  better  tor  our  present  purpose  to  limit  attention  to 
specific  acts.  Harry  Lauder,  the  well-known  singer,  who 
has  lost  a  son  in  the  war,  says  that  he  heard  and  saw  many 
examples  of  German  brutality,  bnt  he  calls  special  atten- 
tion to  two.  The  first  one  .refers  to  sixty  Highlanders  of 
the  Black  Watch  Regiment.  They  were  captured  by  the 
Gtermans  one  night,  and  neither  expected  mercy  nor  wanted 
it,  thon^  to  their  great  surprise,  instead  of  being  killed, 
they  were  ordered  by  the  Germans  to  take  off  every  bit  of 
clothing  from  their  bodies.  Then  the  men  were  left  all 
night  shivering,  naked,  and  up  to  their  waist  in  the  mud 
of  the  trenches.  Towards  morning  an  Officer  approached 
the  Highlanders  and  told  them  they  might  go  back  to  their 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Qerman  Moral  Abnormality  87 

tr^iches.  Tbe  men  could  not  believe  the  words  they  beard  j 
but,  overjoyed  at  their  unexpected  freedom,  they  started 
forth  across  No  Mrd's  Land,  remarking  to  one  another  that 
after  all  they  must  have  misjadged  the  Germans.  But  un- 
fortunately they  had  not.  For  when  the  Highlanders  had 
gone  about  fifty  yards  they  heard  the  Germans  laughing 
and  jeering,  and  the  next  moment  a  machine  gun  was 
turned  on  them,  mowing  them  down  instantly,  to  the  great 
enjoyment  of  the  German  soldiers  in  the  trenches.  Only 
one  man  was  not  killed  outright,  and  when  he  was  brought 
in  by  an  anbulance  he  told  the  Officers  what  bad  happoied. 

The  other  incident  mentioned  by  Lauder  is  of  a  British 
soldier  who  noticed  a  fountain  pen  lying  in  a  trench  which 
he  and  the  others  had  taken.  Thinking  that  the  pen  would 
be  handy  for  the  purpose  of  writing  home  to  his  wife,  he 
picked  it  up,  and  the  next  tiling  he  knew  was  that  he  was 
in  a  hospital  with  half  of  his  face  off.  The  Germans  had 
put  dynamite  in  the  pen  before  leaving  the  trench,  and 
Lauder  found  the  poor  fellow  in  such  a  state,  with  one  eye 
and  half  bis  face  blown  away,  that  it  was  sickening  to 
gaze  at  him. 

Bir  Arthur  Yapp  told  an  audience  in  Toronto,  some 
weeks  ago,  of  similar  instances  of  Gterman  cruelty.  When 
the  British  soldiers  had  taken  Peronne  a  piano  was  found 
in  one  of  the  houses,  and  a  soldier  who  could  play  went 
forward  to  enjoy  a  tune.  An  Officer  close  by  warned  bim 
to  look  into  the  piano  before  he  attempted  to  play,  and  on 
doing  so  a  bomb  was  found  inside,  arranged  to  explode 
when  the  piano  was  played.  On  another  occasion,  when 
the  Germans  had  evacuated  a  town  and  the  British  en- 
tered it,  a  live  kitten  was  found  on  a  door,  nailed  to  the 
woodwork  by  its  forepaws,  and  crying  piteously  in  its  pain. 
It  was  only  a  matter  of  a  moment  for  a  British  soldier 
to  rush  to  its  release,  but  in  pulling  the  nails  out  of  the 
kitten's  paws  an  engine  of  destruction  behind  the  door  was 
loosed,  and  man  and  kitten  were  at  once  blown  across  the 
road  in  atoms.    It  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to  under- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


88  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

stand  the  state  of  mind  that  wonld  at  once  cause  pain  to 
a  dumb  animal,  and  make  this  in  turn  the  meaus  of  human 
destruction. 

Lieutenant  Coningsby  Dawson,  who  has  just  returned 
home  to  recover  from  a  wound,  told  a  oorreapondent  of  the 
New  York  Times  two  instances  from  his  own  experience. 
This  is  one  of  them; — 

"  During  a  drive  of  one  of  the  CanadiaD  divisions  to 
which  I  was  attached,  a  young  officer  in  command  of  a 
tank  was  very  keen  to  go  ahead.  When  the  enemy  coun- 
terattacked, he  was  left  high  and  dry.  Afterward,  when 
our  division  again  drove  the  Huns  back,  we  found  that  he 
and  the  crew  of  the  tank  had  been  taken  out,  stripped, 
lashed  to  the  tank  and  then  bombed  to  death." 

Here  is  the  other : — 

"  Rome  Australians  who  were  in  the  same  show  with  us 
at  the  end  of  August  saw  a  dead  Gterman  officer  on  a 
stretcher  which  had  been  left  behind.  When  some  of  the 
soldiers  went  to  lift  the  stretcher  with  the  intention  of 
giving  him  a  decent  burial,  it  exploded  a  small  mine  under- 
neath and  all  of  them  were  killed.  It  was  a  booby-trap  set 
by  the  Huns,  knowing  full  well  that  the  Allies  were  too 
decent  to  pass  the  body  of  an  enemy  by." 

It  is  not  surprising  that  Lieutenant  Dawson  remarks 
that  the  Oermans  "  trade  on  the  decent  feelings  of  Allies 
in  every  way  in  order  to  take  a  mean  advantage  of  them." 
But  again,  there  is  the  problem  of  the  cause  of  this  fiend- 
ish barbarity  in  a  people  presumably  civilized. 


Actions  arising  out  of  the  war  call  for  attention.  Mr. 
Kellogg,  who  was  the  chief  assistant  of  Mr.  Hoover  in  Bel- 
gium, told  an  incident  in  The  Atlantic  Monthly  which  has 
a  definite  bearing  on  onr  problem.  In  October,  1917,  680 
Belgian  children,  their  ages  from  four  to  twelve,  were  at 
Evian  les  Bains  on  one  train,  and  the  poor  little  creatures 
were  emaciated,  sickly,  and  absolutely  alone,  without  the 
loving  care  of  mothers  and  elder  sisters.    They  had  been 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Oerman  Moral  Abnormality  89 

sent  oat  of  Belgium,  and  had  actually  been  taken  down  to 
Bwitzerland  so  that  they  might  enter  France,  through 
Switzerland,  to  be  cared  for.  Two  thirds  of  the  chUdren 
belonged  to  parents  whose  fathers  would  not  work  for  the 
Oerman  army  and  were  being  starved  into  submiaaion,  and 
the  mothers  were  willing  to  let  their  little  ones  go  rather 
than  see  them  also  starred.  As  Mr.  Kello^  remarks,  we 
have  only  to  think  of  that  line  of  weak,  little  motherless 
things,  climbing  down  from  the  train  and  marcbing  along 
the  platform  as  bravely  as  they  conld,  into  the  hands  of 
kindly  but  unknown  foster-mothers  and  foster-sisters. 
Nothing  conld  be  sadder  or  more  poignant  than  this  epi- 
sode. It  might  have  been  thought  that  humanity  alone 
would  have  prevented  the  Germans  from  venting  on  these 
poor  innocent  children  such  unnecessary  cruelty. 

In  a  recent  number  of  The  Outlook  Dr.  Joseph  H.  Odell 
wrote  of  his  visit  to  Chateau  Thierry,  where  the  Americans 
won  their  first  victory.  Dr.  Odell's  words  speak  for  them- 
selves : — 

"Why  do  Americans  persist  in  differentiating  between 
the  German  military  caste  and  the  German  people?  They 
were  ordinary  Boche  regiments  which  held  Ch&tean  Thierry, 
and  when  their  evacuation  of  the  place  became  obviously 
necessary  they  set  afoont  to  destroy  and  pollute  everything 
within  reach.  Remember,  this  is  not  hearsay;  I  went  into 
Chftteau  Thierry  on  the  heels  of  the  American  advance  and 
saw  things  with  my  own  eyes.  Every  vandalistic,  Hun- 
nish,  fiendish,  filthy  thing  l^at  men  conld  do  these  Huns 
did  in  Ch&teau  Thierry  just  before  they  left.  The  streets 
were  littered  with  the  private  possessions  of  the  citizens 
thrown  through  the  windows;  every  bureau  and  chiffonier 
drawer  was  rifled  and  its  contents  destroyed ;  in  the  better- 
class  houses  the  paintings  were  ripped  and  the  china  and 
porcelain  smashed;  furniture  was  broken  or  hacked;  mir- 
rors were  shivered  into  a  thousand  fragments;  mattresses 
and  npholstery  were  slashed ;  richly  bound  books  were 
ripped;  in  fact,  there  was  hardly  a  thing  in  the  city  left 
intact.  The  houses  of  the  poor,  in  which  the  German  pri- 
vates had  been  billeted,  were  just  as  badly  pillaged  and 
devastated  as  the  homes  of  the  well-to-do.     The  church, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


90  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

grand  enough  for  a  cathedral,  had  not  been  spared.  Its 
paintings  and  altars  and  crucifixes  and  stations  of  the 
cross  had  been  ruthlessly  battered  and  defiled.  Yet  even 
this  does  not  tell  the  story  —  a  story  wbicb  cannot  be  told 
to  people  who  respect  decency  —  for  the  Germans  left 
tokenn  of  physical  and  mental  obscenity  in  every  house  I 
visited,  and  I  entered  scorea.  If  all  hell  had  been  let  loose  in 
a  choice  suburban  town  for  half  a  day  it  could  not  have 
put  itB  obscene  and  diabolical  mark  on  a  place  more  un- 
mistakably than  the  Germans  put  theirs  on  Cbfttean 
Thierry.  I  stood  amazed  that  there  could  be  so  much  un- 
relieved vileness,  such  organized  beastliness,  in  the  world." 

Mr.  Walter  Dnranty,  one  of  the  correspondents  of  the 
New  York  Times,  telegraphing  to  that  paper  on  September 
12,  speaks  of  his  experience  of  the  evacuation  of  the  city  of 
Ham,  and  says  that  for  pure  wantonness  of  destruction  it 
offers  an  example  that  even  the  Qermans  will  find  it  hard 
to  beat.  The  place  was  swept  with  fire,  though  the  town 
was  practically  uninjured  by  shell  fire  of  friend  and  foe. 
The  German  incendiarism  was  carried  out  with  deliberate 
thoroughness,  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  the  position 
of  the  place,  on  what  was  virtually  an  island,  made  it  un- 
available for  military  purposes  when  once  the  bridges  were 
destroyed.  Here,  again,  the  action,  which  is  no  mere  im- 
pulse of  a  few  undisciplined  individuals  but  part  of  a 
carefully  arranged  plan,  caUs  for  a  thorough  explanation 
on  moral  grounds. 


It  is  impossible  to  do  more  than  give  brief  notice  to  the 
various  political  efforts  put  forth  by  Germany  in  connec- 
tion with  the  war.  One  of  the  worst  acts  is  the  tampering 
with  the  honor  and  loyalty  of  prisoners  of  war,  of  which 
there  is  ample  documentary  evidence,  A  Swiss  paper  pub- 
lishes a  I>ook  of  documents,  obtained  direct  from  Berlin, 
under  the  title  of  "  Documents  of  Disgrace.  The  German 
Qovemment  Incites  Men  to  Turn  Traitors."  It  is  impos- 
sible to  go  into  detail  In  regard  to  these  efforts,  which  in- 
clude the  endeavor  to  seduce  Irish,  North-African  Arab, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Oerman  Moral  Abnormality  91 

Indian,  and  Ukranian  prisoners.  In  reference  to  Arabs 
one  military  atitliority  eaya  tliat  tliere  mast  be  "  no  thought 
of  treating  them  kindly  or  mildly  ...  if  kindness  be  shown 
to  sach  people  without  a  canse  they  scent  weakness  and 
are  never  satisfied."  A  secret  order  shows  that  some  of 
the  Officers  in  propaganda  camps  dared  to  feel  that  their 
work  was  "  incompatible  with  the  sense  of  duty  and  honor 
of  a  German  soldier,"  but  their  Commander  made  short 
work  of  such  scruples  and,  as  the  Swiss  paper  remarks: 
"  that  I'ruBsian  Officers  should  consider  the  daties  assigned 
to  them  by  the  War  Office  and  Foreign  Office  incompatible 
with  their  honor  is  a  criticism  of  the  political  morality  of 
these  functionaries  in  the  empire  which  speaks  volumes." 

A  pamphlet  has  been  issued  dealing  with  German  in- 
trigues in  Persia,  giving  the  diary  of  a  Oerman  agent 
who  went  through  Persia  to  Afghanistan  during  the  early 
months  of  the  war.  Wherever  a  strong  state  could  be  ham- 
pered, or  a  weak  state  conld  be  exploited,  there  German 
agents  made  their  way  and  spread  intrigues.  The  diary 
is  published  in  extenso  and  records  eleven  months  of  das- 
tardly work.  It  is  a  satisfaction  to  know  that  the  expedi- 
tion was  an  utter  failure,  but  the  diary  is  full  of  significant 
interest  as  a  revelation  of  German  methods  and  of  Ger- 
man temper. 

Perhaps,  however,  the  most  remarkable  illustration  of 
German  political  effort  was  given  by  Dr.  Zwemer  in  his 
addresses  at  various  places  last  summer  on  Pau-Islaraiam 
and  the  War.  He  based  what  he  said  on  documents  which 
are  absolutely  convincing,  and  told  the  story  of  "  a  Protest- 
ant nation  trampling  on  her  own  conceptions  of  world 
righteousness  and  turning  the  Near  East  into  a  shambles, 
or  trying  to  turn  it  iuto  a  shambles,  by  proclaiming  a  Holy 
War."  The  whole  of  it  can  be  read  in  Ambassador  Mor- 
genthan's  articles  in  The  World's  Work,  soon  to  appear 
in  book  form.  It  was  a  Pan-Islamic  movement  against 
Christian  brethren  and,  as  Dr.  Zwemer  says,  it  was  "  char- 
acterized by  a  deep  knowledge  of  the  undercurrents  of  rest- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


*d2  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

lessuess  and  diBsatisfaction,  political,  social,  intellectaal, 
religious,  all  over  the  world."  After  preparing  the  ground 
for  the  sowing  of  this  awful  seed  of  intrigue,  the  work  be- 
gan by  press  propaganda  which  took  every  imaginable 
form.  Huge  sums  of  money  were  spent  and  the  work  was 
carried  on  in  many  different  languages.  "  The  centres  for 
mailing  this  inflammable  literature  were  chosen  with  con- 
summate cunning.  The  three  centres  from  which  it  was 
sent  to  avoid  the  press  censorship  and  to  enter  without  the 
knowledge  of  the  postal  officials,  were  Barcelona,  Spain, 
San  Francisco,  California,  and  Bangkok,  Biam.  When  the 
time  was  ripe  and  Turkey  was  restless,  a  Holy  War  was 
.  proclaimed  by  the  leaders  of  the  Mohammedan  faith." 
This  is  how  Dr.  Zwemer  sums  up  the  project : — 

"  Can  you  conceive  of  any  plan,  to  put  it  in  sober  tan- 
kage, can  you  conceive  of  any  plan  that  was  more  devil- 
ish in  its  conception  and  proposed  execution  than  to  set 
«n  flame  the  passions  of  men  from  Morocco  to  Calcntta  by 
such  a  document?  Can  you  think  what  would  have  hap- 
pened to  the  million  Copts  of  Egypt  had  the  ten  million 
Mohammedans  obeyed  that  proclamation?  Can  yon  im- 
agine what  would  have  happened  to  the  little  handfuls  of 
Christiana  in  Morocco,  Tunis,  Algiers,  in  ^Northern  Persia, 
in  Sonthem  Persia  —  aye  —  what  would  have  happened 
again  in  India  compared  with  the  days  of  the  Mutiny,  if  this 
programme  had  unrolle*!  from  the  borders  of  Afghanis- 
tan, down  the  valleys  of  the  Punjab  into  Bengal;  and  India 
with  sixty-seven  million  Mohammedans,  would  have  had 
a  Holy  War  on  her  hands,  in  these  days  of  universal  unrest, 
in  these  days  when  men's  hearts  long  for  democracy  and 
thirst  with  a  passion  for  nationalism?  And  yet  that  was 
Germany's  deliberate  programme." 

T 

A  more  personal  question,  and  yet  one  that  is  equally 
a  revelation  of  morality,  concerns  the  matter  of  grati- 
tude, and  on  this  some  words  of  Dr.  Newell  Dwight  Hillis 
in  the  New  York  Evening  Bun,  of  May  18,  1918,  may  be 
adduced.  He  gives  notes  of  a  conversation  with  an  Amer- 
ican ambulance  driver,  who  was  on  duty  at  Verdun  dnring 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


lAid] 


Oerman  Moral  Abnormality 


most  of  that  great  battle.  Among  other  thingB  this  man 
saya  that  on  one  momiiig  as  he  was  driving  along  the  road 
he  foxind  himBelf  side  by  aide  with  two  Frenchmen,  carry- 
ing a  German  OflBcer  lying  wounded  upon  the  stretcher^ 
Suddenly  a  shot  rang  out,  and  the  Frenchman  at  the  head 
of  the  stretcher  pitched  forward  and  when  the  cot  fell  tbe- 
German  OflScer  rolled  out  of  it.  He  had  a  revolver  in  his 
right  hand,  and  whUe  lying  on  the  stretcher  he  shot  in  the 
back  the  French  friend  who  was  carrying  him  to  a  place 
of  safety.  It  is  impossible  to  avoid  feeling  sympathy,  if 
not  gratification,  with  the  sequel.  A  French  OflScer  who. 
saw  the  whole  event  put  bis  revolver  against  the  forehead 
of  the  Oerman  Officer  who  had  just  murdered  his  friend,, 
and  blew  the  German's  brains  out. 

In  the  same  article  by  Dr.  Hillis,  another  incident  is- 
told  by  the  ambulance  driver.  One  day  a  Oerman  Captain 
was  found  lying  in  No  Man's  I«nd.  A  cartridge  had  cut 
an  artery  in  bis  arm,  and  with  one  hand  he  was  trying  to- 
stop  the  bleeding.  At  the  risk  of  their  lives  the  French 
stretcher  bearers  went  in  and  carried  the  man  back  to- 
their  dressing  station.  In  ten  days  he  was  nearly  well. 
Among  other  kindnesses  the  Frenchmen  shared  their  lunch- 
eon with  him,  and  indeed  they  may  be  said  to  literally 
have  saved  his  life.  One  day  a  French  General  and  his 
Staff  drew  up  just  behind  the  ambulance  car.  Evidently 
the  Oerman  airmen  had  been  following  the  General's  car^ 
for  they  dropped  a  bomb  shell  that  killed  three  of  the  men 
on  the  General's  Staff.  Pieces  of  their  clothing  were  blown 
literally  against  this  German  Captain's  arm.  The  ambu- 
lance driver  asks  how  would  a  gentleman  have  felt,  and 
remarks  that  the  way  the  German  Captain  felt  towards 
his  own  deliverance  was  seen  in  the  fact  that  he  flung 
np  his  hand  and  shouted  his  delight,  "  Good,  good,  good."^ 
It  is  probably  an  exaggeration,  but  it  is  easy  to  under- 
stand the  American  ambulance  driver's  opinion  that  he 
"never  once  met  a  German  Officer  who  was  a  gentleman. 
. . .  They  are  bom  cads,  they  live  cads,  and  cads  they  will: 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


04  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

die  .  .  .  anj  kindness  shown  them  they  interpret  as  weak- 
neBB." 

As  another  Ulastratlon  of  the  same  lack  of  genuine  mo- 
ralitj,  the  case  may  be  mentioned  of  a  (German  Lieutenant, 
who  commanded  the  ship  which  landed  Sir  Roger  Case- 
ment in  Ireland,  and  was  captured.  The  Lieutenant  gave 
up  twenty  dollars,  when  taken  prisoner,  saying  it  was  all 
he  had.  When  his  captor  asked  "  On  your  honor,"  the  man 
replied,  "  No,  no  more."  A  search  revealed  twenty-one 
English  bank  notes,  amounting  to  over  five  hundred  dol- 
lars, concealed  in  bis  clothing.  The  Attomey-Oeneral 
asked  him,  "  Do  you  think,  under  the  circumstancea,  you 
were  entitled  to  give  an  nntrnthfol  answer?"  The  Lien- 
tenant  replied,  "  There  may  be  different  points  of  view  — ■ 
the  point  of  view  of  an  English  Officer,  and  the  point  of 
view  of  a  German  Officer."  The  difference  in  the  English 
treatment  of  even  anprinripled  enemies  is  indicated  by  the 
decision  in  this  case.  The  Prize  Coort  adjudged  the  Lien- 
tenant's  concealed  money  forfeited  to  the  Crown,  but  it 
granted  him  out  of  it  a  full  month's  pay  (fl30),  and  re- 
turned in  full  to  two  other  Officers  of  the  ship  the  money 
which  they  had  surrendered,  because  they  trathfnUy  stated 
the  amount  ther  i 


It  is  now  time  to  turn  to  the  religious  leaders  of  Ger- 
many, and  the  first  example  is  that  of  Dr.  von  Diyander, 
the  well-known  Court  Preacher,  and  the  Kaiser's  confiden- 
tial spiritual  adviser.  In  a  recent  sermon  in  the  Berlin 
Cathedral  he  said : — 

"As  I  look  back  into  history  and  regard  the  attitude  of 
nations  passing  through  the  fires  of  affliction  I  see  no  ex- 
amples of  fortitude,  lofty  and  enduring  courage,  and  firm 
reliance  on  the  Divine  Will  fit  to  be  compared  with  ours. 
When  I  think  of  it — and  when  am  I  not  tiiinking  of  it?  — 
I  am  profoundly  touched,  and  the  tears  fill  my  eyes,  tears 
of  gratitude  to  the  Almighty  that  He  has  created  me  a 
German  and  called  me  into  the  fellowship  of  a  nation  sn- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  €ferman  Moral  Abnormality  95 

preme  above  all  others  in  evety  quality  and  endowm^it  of 
the  Christian  life.  Although  we  are  snrronnded  by  a  world 
of  eoemieR,  tUthoueh  we  are  the  objects  of  the  most  cmel 
calnninies,  although  our  noblest  qualities  are  revUed  and 
our  simplest  words  distorted,  we  bear  oar  burden  with  the 
fortitude  of  Christian  knights,  and  in  our  inmost  hearts 
the  nation  says,  Father,  forgive  them,  for  they  know  not 
what  they  do." 

In  Tiew  of  the  preacher's  knowledge  of  the  character  of 
the  British,  French,  and  American  people,  it  is  almost  in- 
credible that  he  should  suppose  bis  fellow  countrymen  are 
snpreme  in  every  element  of  Christian  character. 

Another  well-known  preacher  in  Berlin,  also  one  of  the 
Kaiser's  chaplains,  is  Dr.  Conrad,  and  among  other  utter- 
ances is  the  following: — 

"  When,  under  the  hammer  blows  of  Hindenburg,  the 
audacious  spirit  of  our  enemies  has  been  smashed,  when 
their  eyes  have  been  opened  to  see  the  wrong  they  are  do- 
ing to  God  and  man,  when  they  come  to  us  beseeching  for- 
giveness and  pardon,  we  shall  not  refuse  forgiveness,  just 
as  we  ourselves  are  thrown  on  God  for  His  grace.  The 
peace  must  make  an  end  to  all  war  and  all  rage.  We 
would  plough  a  new  furrow." 

At  a  recent  gathering  of  representatives  of  all  the  Ger- 
man missionary  societies,  several  speakers  denounced  the 
iniquitous  policy  which,  it  was  alleged,  England  was  pur- 
suing towards  Foreign  Missions.  Speaker  after  speaker 
told  of  the  brutal  conduct  of  the  British  Government,  who, 
it  was  actually  said,  employed  Missionaries  in  India  and 
Africa  to  do  recruiting  work,  to  stir  up  the  natives  of 
these  countries  to  enlist  against  Germany.  At  a  Confer- 
ence held  at  Upsala,  German  speakers  repeatedly  con- 
demned the  conduct  of  England  towards  German  and 
Swiss  missionaries,  and  one  German  speaker  concluded 
with  these  words : — 

"  We  know  all  about  British  zeal  for  foreign  missions. 
Our  people  have  had  their  eyes  opened.  A  nation  of  huck- 
sters opposes  a  nation  of  heroes,  and  what  can  you  expect 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


W  BibHotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

bat  brutality,  vulgarity  and  cruelty?    Where  is  religion  in 
all  that  British  Empire?    I  ask  where?    I  get  no  answer." 
Pastor  Falck,  of  Berlin,  preaching  on  "  The  Power  of 
GhriBtianity,"  gave  expression  to  this  opinion : — 

"  The  great  military  achievements  of  the  German  empire 
are  really  the  achievements  of  the  Christianity  indwelling 
in  the  German  nation.  The  intellectual  sense  of  the  Ger- 
mans, hitherto  sun-dried  and  averse  from  the  world,  has 
built  the  slender  airship  with  which  the  old  dream  of  man- 
kind has  been  fnlfilled.  The  Gterman  has  created  the  won- 
derfnl  submarine  which  bids  defiance  to  the  foe,  and  day 
by  dftT  crumbles  oS  one  piece  after  another  of  England's 
sea-power.  He  places  his  fabulous  guns  in  position  and 
sends  his  gigantic  shells  into  the  ethereal  regions  of  the 
air,  bringing  destruction  in  their  train  from  a  distance  of 
more  tban  sixty  miles.  The  German  spirit  of  action  brings 
order  in  regions  where  the  misdirected  desire  for  a  so-called 
liberty  has  beaten  into  ruins  every  vestige  of  law.  And 
it  is  this  German  spirit  of  action  which  is  destined  to 
bring  blessing  to  other  nations,  not  last  those  nations  who 
are  now  at  war  with  us." 

In  the  light  of  the  history  of  the  past  four  years  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  understand  the  state  of  mind  that  could  utter  these 
words,  unless,  of  course,  the  German  action  in  Belgium, 
Poland,  Serbia,  and  Armenia  has  been  entirely  hidden 
from  the  preacher. 

Lest  it  should  be  thought  that  these  are  exceptional 
ntterances,  and  do  not  represent  the  average,  ordinary 
German  preaching,  reference  may  be  made  to  a  book  with 
the  curious  titie,  "  Hurrah  and  Hallelujah,"  which  consists 
of  an  elaborate  examination  by  a  Danish  theologian.  Pro- 
fessor Bang,  of  a  large  number  of  ordinary  pulpit  utter- 
ances during  the  war,  abont  which  there  is  no  question. 
The  titie  of  the  book  is  borrowed  from  one  of  the  Pastor- 
poets  of  the  Fatherland.  One  writer  maintains  that  the 
Germans  are  fighting  "  for  the  cause  of  Jesus  within  man- 
kind," and  that  Christianity  is  revealed  in  the  subma- 
rines:— 

"  When  our  submarine,  in  spite  of  an  almost  overwhelm- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Qerman  Mord  Abnormality  97 

ing  superiority  of  force,  in  the  coarse  of  sixty  minutes 
sends  three  Enitlish  crnisers  to  the  bottom,  without  suf- 
fering any  hurt  itself,  this  heroic  deed,  unparalleled  in 
naval  history,  is  for  Christian  people  a  testimony  from  the 
Lord  on  high,  '  I  am  with  you !    Do  ye  see  it  ?' " 

Another  Clergyman  opens  a  prayer  with  this  invocation : 
"  Thou  who  dwellest  high  above  cherubim,  seraphim,  and 
Zeppelins."  And  a  Qerman  religions  paper  thus  explains 
(with  curious  logic)  the  duty  of  bombing  London,  which, 
of  course,  was  only  put  in  a  state  of  self-defense  by  the 
coming  of  the  Zeppelins: — 

"  liOndon  is  no  longer  by  any  means  an  unfortified  city. 
It  is  armed  with  such  quantities  of  anti-aircraft  guns  and 
aeroplanes,  that  the  Zeppelins,  as  is  well  known,  only  ren- 
ture  to  attack  the  city  hy  night.  .  .  .  Tx)ndon  is  the  heart 
and  the  hearth  of  this  terrible  world-war,  there  sit  the  min- 
isters who  have  precipitated  Enrope  into  misery,  there  is 
the  witch's  cauldron,  in  which  fresh  misery  is  ever  brew- 
ing for  the  peoples  of  Europe,  already  bleeding  from  a 
thousand  wounds.  To  attack  I^udon  is  to  attack  the  den 
of  murderers." 

Perhaps,  however,  the  strangest  utterance  is  the  "  war- 
time paraphrase  "  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  by  a  Clergyman : — 

"  Though  the  warrior's  bread  be  scanty,  do  Thou  work 
daily  death  anri  tenfold  woe  nnto  the  enemy.  Forgive  in 
merciful  long-suffering  each  bullet  and  each  blow  which 
misses  its  mark!  Lead  us  not  into  the  temptation  of  let- 
ting our  wrath  be  too  tame  in  carrying  out  Thy  divine 
judgment!  Deliver  us  and  our  Ally  from  the  infernal 
Enemy  and  his  servants  on  earth.  Thine  is  the  kingdom, 
the  German  land ;  may  we,  by  aid  of  Thy  steel-clad  hand^ 
achieve  the  power  and  the  glory." 

From  preachers  we  turn  to  professors,  and  among  those- 
best  known  in  England  is  Professor  Herrmann,  of  Mar- 
burg, whose  book,  "  Communion  with  God,"  is  one  of  the 
most  famUiar  and  spiritual  of  German  works  translated 
into  English,  even  though  it  does  not  measure  up  to  the 
New  Testament  idea  of  our  Lord.  Herrmann  set  himself 
to  justify  Germany,  from  a  religions  point  of  view,  in 
allying  herself  with  the  Turks.  This  was  pretty  awkward 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  301.    7 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


98  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

because  Gtermany  has  been  in  the  babit  of  deDouncing  the 
Allies  for  bringing  heathen  into  the  field  ot  battle : — 

"  It  is  true  that  the  Mohammedans  do  not  know  the  Old 
or  the  New  Testament,  and  Mohammed  did  not  understand 
Jesus.  Yet  they  are  in  some  respects  superior  to  us.  It  is 
a  stupendous  feat  that  this  religion  should  in  so  short  a 
time  hare  spread  from  India  to  Granada.  Another  point 
is  that  the  Turks  have  been  unified  by  their  religion ;  the 
Germans  have  not.  The  main  thing,  however,  is  this,  that 
the  faith  of  the  Turks  assures  them  that  God  ordains  ever}'- 
thing,  and  is  the  realitj'  in  everything.  The  word  Islam 
means  exactly  the  same  as  the  Biblical  word  faith,  that  is, 
complete  self-surrender.  As  Goethe  said,  when  this  be- 
came clear  to  him :  '  Then  we  are  all  of  us,  in  reality,  be- 
lievers in  Islam ! '  But  Mohammed  also  maintains  that  we 
are  free  and  responsible  for  what  we  do,  wherefore  God 
will  judge  us  all;  and  in  this,  too,  we  agree  with  him.  On 
no  account  must  one  suppose  that  the  Mohammedan  belief 
in  God  is  only  a  belief  in  an  inflexible  fate.  No,  it  is  also 
a  belief  in  God's  wisdom  and  goodness.  There  is  certainly 
this  difference,  that  only  by  looking  to  Jesus  can  we  Chris- 
tians find  courage  to  hold  such  a  faith.  Nevertheless,  we 
must  maintain  that  we  stand  near  to  the  Turks  in  our  faith 
—  only  they  have  not  recognized  the  right  foundation  of 
the  faith  they  bold.  But  we  Germans  can  help  them  to 
that." 

One  of  the  German  Professors  most  truly  honored  be- 
fore the  war  was  Dr.  Deissmann,  of  Berlin,  whose  work  in 
connection  with  the  papyri  is  well  known  and  greatly  val- 
ued, as  is  seen  in  several  of  his  books.  For  some  time 
daring  the  war.  Professor  Deissmann  wrote  a  "  Weekly 
Protestant  Letter"  to  neutral  countries,  and  through  the 
kindness  of  an  American  friend,  I  have  obtained  an  almost 
complete  set  of  these  communications.  The  n^ve  way  in 
which  Dr.  Deissmann  records  everything  against  the  Brit- 
ish soldiers  and  in  favor  of  the  Germans  without  any 
question,  still  lees  examination,  is  rwnarkable  in  view  of 
the  Professor's  well-known  Christian  attitude  before  the 
war.  But  it  would  seem  as  if  his  national  prejudices  had 
almost  entirely  blinded  hia  Christian  judgment,  for  even 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  German  Moral  Abnormality  99 

wheD  he  leamt  of  the  dastardly  torpedoing  of  the  vessel 
in  which  his  personal  and  close  friend,  Dr.  J.  H.  Monlton, 
was  traveling  from  India,  Deissmann  did  not  express  the 
slightest  regret  for  the  cause  which  led  to  Moulton's  un- 
timely death.  About  two  years  ago  Deissmann  alluded  to 
the  war  in  the  following  words: — 

"  Germany's  sons,  both  at  the  front  and  at  home^  are 
doing  deeds  which  entitle  them  to  canonization.  They  are 
the  same  stoclt  as  that  which  has  produced  the  noblest 
saints  of  all  time!  Our  great  reformers  of  the  sixteenth 
century,  our  wonderful  hymn-writers,  our  gentle  priests, 
our  profound  divines  have  not  a  higher  title  to  our  re- 
ligions veneration  than  those  magnificent  sods  of  ours 
who,  with  unparalleled  valour,  are  defending  the  Father- 
land against  the  base  and  greedy  attacks  of  rapacious 
and  dishonorable  adversaria.  We  are  profoundly  grate- 
ful to  these  men  of  God  in  our  trenches,  men  of  God  be- 
cause they  are  doing  God's  work,  and  I  have  no  hesita- 
tion in  proclaiming  here  openly  that  when  I  think  of  their 
work,  of  their  sublime  self-sacrifice,  I  am  engaged  in  re- 
ligious contemplation.  These  men  of  ours,  these  great 
German  men,  are  the  best  examples  of  modern  Saints  of 
Ood." 

Even  before  these  words  were  uttered  there  had  been 
ample  evidence  of  action  in  Belgium  that  might  have  been 
expected  to  prevent  anyone  raising  the  German  soldiers  in 
the  trenches  to  the  position  of  Saints. 

As  a  contrast  to  these  academic  utterances  from  Berlin, 
it  may  l>e  useful  to  turn  to  a  village  in  Swabia,  in  south- 
em  Germany,  where  the  people  are  shepherded  by  a  Ro- 
man Catholic,  named  Lilienthal.  This  is  how  the  village 
preacher  teaches  the  Swabian  peasants.  After  showing 
that  to  stand  in  the  trenches  and  shoot  the  enemies  of 
Germany  is  iu  itself  a  religious  action,  and  that  death 
met  while  a  German  soldier  is  so  engaged,  entitles  the 
soul  of  the  departed  into  immediate  entrance  into  Para- 
dise, the  sermon  proceeds  thus; — 

"  But  you  may  ask  me  what  about  the  enemy's  soldiers 
in  the  trenches?  Are  they  not  also  doing  the  work  of  God 
in  defending  their  country?    Is  tlieir  death  under  similar 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


100  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

circumstances  not  to  be  rewarded?  Beloved,  to  allow  such 
thoughts  even  to  enter  your  minds  is  to  be  guilty  of  sin. 
Bear  in  mind  in  the  first  place  that  the  enemy  soldiers  are 
not  defending  their  country,  but  attacking  ours.  They  are 
the  aggressorsj  they  are  transgressors  of  the  law  of  God. 
Their  death  is  only  the  precursor  of  condign  punishment 
in  the  next  world.  None  of  them  can  escape  the  wrath  of 
God.  How  many  of  you  have  heard  those  perfectly  well 
authenticated  stories  of  visions  seen  by  our  brave  Swa- 
bians?  Do  you  remember  the  vision  of  Sebastian  Bauer, 
of  Dillingen?  He  saw  hosts  in  shining  raiment  hovering 
over  our  armies  on  the  Somme,  angels  with  solemn  and 
beautiful  faces  waiting  to  bear  the  souls  of  the  German 
dead  into  the  loved  presence  of  their  Maker.  And  away 
beyond,  on  the  other  side,  hovering  over  the  British,  were 
the  dark  and  sinister  forms  of  demons  bearing  in  their 
wake  the  smoke  and  fire  of  hetl,  waiting  for  the  souls  of 
the  base  English  who  had  forgotten  God  in  their  rapacity 
and  lust  for  power.  Beloved,  in  this  war  there  are  not  two 
sides  to  any  question.  We  are  on  God's  side  and  God  ia 
on  ours.  Our  Kaiser,  our  King,  our  armies,  are  all  instru- 
ments of  the  Divine  vengeance  on  a  world  corrupted  by 
sin.  We  Germans  are  the  chosen  flail  with  which  the  chaff 
is  to  be  divided  from  tbe  wheat,  the  husbandman  who  is 
to  gather  up  the  tares  for  eternal  punishment,  the  shep- 
herd who  is  to  separate  the  sheep  from  the  goats." 

Very  much  more  could  be  adduced  from  preachers  and 
professors  in  support  of  the  contentions  now  made,  but 
these  will  suffice  to  emphasize  the  theme  of  this  article, 
the  explanation  of  all  these  marvelous  aberrations  from 
simple  Christian  ethics. 

It  is  thought  by  many  that  this  is  due  to  the  insistence 
on  which  the  power  of  the  State  is  emphasized  throughout 
Germany.  One  professor  says  in  plainest  language  that 
between  States  there  is  only  one  force  of  right,  the  right 
of  the  strongest,  and  that  it  is  impossible  for  a  State  to 
commit  a  crime.  !Not  all  the  treaties  in  tbe  world,  he 
wrote,  can  alter  the  fact  that  the  weak  is  always  the  prey 
of  the  stronger,  and  as  soon  as  States  are  considered  as 
intelligent  entities  diSQculties  between  them  are  only  capa- 
ble of  solution  by  force.     If  these  are  the  doctrines  on 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  German  Moral  Abnormality  101 

which  Qerman;  has  been  fed  it  la  not  aarpriaing  that 
the  leaders  ahonld  regard  treaties  as  "  scraps  of  paper." 
But  it  ia  atUl  necessary  to  get  behind  thia  doctrine  of  the 
8tate  and  try  to  discover  why  sach  teaching  is  regarded 
as  right  and  jaatifiable. 

On  the  question  of  indlTidnal  action  as  distinct  from 
academic  theory,  the  American  ambulance  driver,  referred 
to  above,  says  that  after  months  of  observatioD  be  has 
come  to  the  conclusion  that  "  between  the  degenerate  Oer- 
man  and  the  civilized  man  of  England,  France  and  Amer- 
ica, there  is  a  gulf  of  thonsands  of  years."  He  also  remarks 
that  aa  there  is  a  musical  sense,  and  a  color  sense,  there  is 
also  the  instinct  of  the  gentleman,  who  is  kind  and  would 
rather  die  than  do  anything  dishonorable;  but  the  aver- 
age German  Officer  and  soldier,  he  maintains,  are  illus- 
trations of  an  over-developed  intellect  with  the  rest  of  the 
sool  shriveled.  One  of  the  Germans  themselves,  writing 
from  Switzerland,  during  this  war,  baa  frankly  aaid  that 
his  countrymen  are  still  "  barbarians."  On  any  showing, 
these  exhibitions  of  savagery  in  word  and  deed  demand  a 
thorough  explanation,  especially  aa  coming  from  a  country 
like  Germany  which  the  modem  world  has  regarded  as  in 
the  van  of  culture  and  progress. 


In  the  face  of  all  these  {let  us  put  it  mildly)  aberra- 
tions from  ordinary  ethical  standards,  not  mnch  need  be 
added  by  way  of  application,  bnt  this  at  least  must  be 
said.  Germany  is  the  nation  which,  before  the  war,  was 
r^arded  as  the  source  of  the  latest,  truest,  and  best  Bib- 
lical scholarship.  Yet  if  "  By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know 
them  "  expresses  a  true  principle,  then  those  who  refused 
to  bow  down  to  Gterman  scholarship  have  been  abundantly 
vindicated  by  the  events  of  the  past  four  years.  The  one 
thing  that  is  needed  beyond  all  else,  for  a  thorough  and 
proper  knowledge  of  the  Bible,  is  spiritual  insight,  and 
thia  is  just  the  featnre  most  wofuUy  lacking  in  German 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


102  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

tbongbt  and  life.  It  is  not  too  much  to  demand  that  those 
who  taught  onr  young  men  and  women  to  turn  to  Ger- 
many  for  the  most  ecbolarly  and  reliable  information  about 
the  Bible,  and  who  scouted  and  scorned  those  who  opp(»ed 
this  policy,  Bhould  at  least  acknowledge  their  error  and 
Inaugurate  a  new  method  among  students,  teaching  them 
to  refuse  to  accept  truth  on  the  authority  of  Germany  or 
any  other  country,  and  to  insist  upon  the  thorough  con- 
sideration of  every  available  source  of  information  before 
arriving  at  conclusions.  Already  Dr.  Shailer  Mathews  is 
quoted  (let  us  hope  truly)  as  admitting  tbat  the  Univer- 
sity of  Chicago  had  been  far  too  much  "  Germanized  "  be- 
fore the  war.  It  is  time  for  otbera  to  say  the  same  thing, 
and  henceforward  to  take  a  very  different  line.  Those  who 
have  read  the  striking  articles  in  The  Sunday  School 
Times  on  the  Paganism  of  certain  modem  Universities 
know  that  much  of  this  attitude  is  due  to  Germany.  What 
is  still  more  serious  is  that  the  German  spirit  has  domi- 
nated our  theological  seminaries,  and  bas  affected,  or, 
rather,  infected,  very  much  of  our  pulpit  life  and  work, 
with  the  result  that  there  is  abundant  spiritual  powerleas- 
ness  in  many  Churches,  by  the  absence  of  conversions  and 
the  lack  of  spiritual  teaching  for  Christians.  Whatever 
may  be  said  about  conservative  scholarship  and  attitude,  . 
it  is  impossible  to  question  its  evangelistic  power,  as  may 
be  seen  from  the  fact  that  all  the  great  Evangelists  of  the 
past  and  the  present  are  to  a  man  opposed  to  Qerman  Bib- 
lical criticism.  As  the  President  of  the  British  Wesleyan 
Methodist  Conference  for  this  year  said  once,  "  German 
theology  is  not  much  use  in  a  revival."  Dr.  Orr  wrote 
these  solemn  words  some  years  ago,  and  they  have  been 
amply  confirmed  and  vindicated  by  the  revelations  of  the 
past  four  years : — 

"  I  dare  to  say  with  a  full  sense  of  responsibility  that  if 
many  of  the  things  which  are  found  in  our  approved  text 
books  were  openly  or  undisguisedly  preached  in  our  pul- 
pits next  Lord's  Day  throughout  the  land,  there  would 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Oerman  Moral  Abnormality  103 

be  nothing  less  than  a  revolution  in  our  Cbnrches.  Chris- 
tian people  simply  wonld  not  stand  it." 

It  is  well  known  that  there  is  not  a  single  critical  posi- 
tion adopted  by  British,  American,  and  Canadian  scholars 
which  did  not  emanate  from  Qermany.  English-speaking 
scholars  have  only  been  able  to  adopt  and  adapt  German 
ideas,  the  general  trend  of  which,  for  nearly  a  centnry, 
has  been  to  deny  the  snpematnral  element,  first  in  the  Old 
Testament,  then  in  the  New  Testament,  and  now,  moat 
serioas  of  all,  in  the  Person  of  Christ  Himself.  If  British 
and  American  scholarship  is  not  so  logical  as  German,  it 
is  becanse  many  of  the  men  still  adhere  to  a  belief  in  the 
Divine  incarnation  of  Christ.  Bnt,  as  Dr.  Orr  pointed 
OQt,  it  is  impossible  to  fit  the  supernatural  into  a  frame- 
work of  rationalism.  It  lb  probably  too  mnch  to  expect 
that  men  who  have  been  brought  up  on  German  scholar- 
ship should  abandon  it  and  confess  themselves  in  the 
wrong.  But  at  least  they  should,  in  the  light  of  our  pres- 
ent experiences,  keep  qniet,  and  snggest  to  the  younger 
generation  the  need  of  a  more  thorough  independence  of 
outlook  and  the  widest  possible  indnction. 

I  cannot  better  close  this  article,  and  thereby  still  fur- 
ther point  the  moral,  than  by  qnoting  some  words  from 
an  American  preacher  which  appeared  two  years  ago  iu 
the  Boston  Congregationalist: — ■ 

"  It  is  rather  the  fashion  in  America  just  now  to  think 
of  Germany  as  a  horrible  example  of  militarism,  but  let 
us  not  forget  that  before  the  outbreak  which  is  shaking 
the  01(1  World  it  was  quite  the  fashion  to  go  to  Germany 
for  an  up-to-date  theology,  for  the  latest  conclusions  of 
scholarship  and  all  that;  and  let  us  also  not  forget  the 
numerous  accumulations  and  aceretions  which  had  gath- 
ered over  this  theology,  the  elaborate  and  learned  criti- 
cisms, the  substitution  of  alleged  historic  values  for  actual 
facts,  the  cnrious  and  desperate  exegesis  which  resolved 
solid  old  texts  into  mists  of  meaningless  nothings,  and  the 
volumes  of  philosophical  stuff  which  smothered  simple  be- 
lief. The  Allies  have  not  yet  declared  German  theology 
.contraband,  for  they  know  that  a  ton  of  it  if  loaded  into 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


104  BibUotbeoa  Sacra 

a  cannon  wonld  not  kill  a  robin,  bnt  tbere  would  be  no  kick 
coming  if  thej  did  declare  it  contraband.  Tbe  Germana 
now  know  as  well  as  the  rest  of  ns  that  the  only  thing 
which  has  historic  value  ia  the  real  atuff.  And  they  also 
know  that  biatory  ia  not  made  ont  of  philosophical  theory 
set  up  in  a  modem  study,  but  out  of  guns  and  battalions. 
The  man  who  thought  two  years  ago  that  some  things 
could  not  have  happened  in  the  past  now  knows  that  much 
worse  things  can  happen  and  are  happening  at  present. 
The  war  bes  jarred  the  world  back  to  a  sense  of  reality. 
We  feel  compelled  to  cut  our  way  through  a  tangle  of 
theories,  speculations  and  philosophies  and  sophistries  and 
get  down  to  simpler  belief. 

"  I  am  not  advising  any  minister  to  lay  off  his  frock 
coat,  for  I  know  how  dear  it  may  be  to  him  and  that  it 
may  be  a  support  to  bis  sense  of  responsibility,  but  I  am 
advising  him  to  lay  away  tbe  things  which  have  made  some 
preachers  look  like  a  baby  buried  in  pillows  and  cushions, 
and  to  cultivate  the  direct,  manly  appeal  which  goes  where 
men  actually  live.  Tbe  dreadful  convulsion  of  the  Old 
World  may  not  have  made  the  task  of  the  preacher  and 
moral  teacher  easier,  but  it  has  made  the  way  plainer  and 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


CHRISTIAN  MONASTICISM  AND  ITS  PLACE  IN 
HISTORY 

IAN  C.  HANNAH,  F.8.A.,  OBIRLIN,  OHIO 

Vebt  many  and  very  varied  were  the  influences  that 
helped  to  mold  the  infant  ehnrch  of  Chriet.  The  deeply 
religious  trend  of  ancient  Jewry,  the  noble  philosophy  of 
cheerful  Greece,  the  ideals  of  the  sorrow-loving  East,  the 
imperial  spirit  of  mighty  Rome,  —  all  had  tbelr  share. 

While  Greece  found  God  in  everythuig,  and  deified  the 
lovely  earth  she  knew,  Asia  had  long  ago  come  to  the  con- 
clusion that  matter  is  essentially  evU,  that  flesh  ia  very 
vile,  and  therefore  the  world  ia  to  be  fled,  five  hundred 
years  earlier  than  the  days  of  Christ  such  conceptions  had 
inspired  Gautama  Buddha  to  give  a  rule  to  monks  and 
nuns,  but  that  was  very  far  from  being  the  first  institu- 
tion of  monasticism.  Christ  eating  and  drinking  amidst 
the  busy  haunts  of  men  had  been  accepted  as  a  far  nobler 
figure  than  John  the  Baptist  fasting  in  the  wilda.  Ascet- 
icism was  largely  foreign  to  the  early  spirit  of  the  church, 
thou^  the  ideal  may  find  much  support  in  the  New 
Testament  itself,  particularly  in  such  passages  as  the  sev- 
enth chapter  of  First  Corinthians.  But  after  three  eea- 
tnries,  or  less,  had  passed  since  the  birth  of  Christ,  when 
pagan  monks,  apparently  in  Egypt  first,  had  seen  the  light, 
the  ideal  spread  through  Christendom  with  great  rapidity, 
from  end  to  end.  Very  shortly  we  find  Christian  monks 
pursuing  their  most  varied  avocations  amidst  the  dense 
forests  of  northern  Europe,  on  the  hot  sands  of  Sahara, 
mnd  by  the  treeless  rocks  beside  the  Nile;  under  the  tower- 
ing mountains  of  far  Armenia  and  in  the  lonely  rock 
Islands  of  the  Atlantic  off  the  remotest  Irish  shores. 

It  ie  one  of  the  most  striking  paradoxes  of  all  time  that 
this  Bastem  system,  aiming  only  at  the  highest  conceiva- 
ble religion,  did  far  less  for  personal  holiness  than  (or  re- 
constmcting  the  civilization  of  the  earth.    Those  who  fled 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


106  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

the  world  in  deepair  became  its  rulers.  Tbe  spiritnal  de- 
sceDdauts  of  thoee  who  spurned  tbe  eartb's  noblest  culture 
became  tbe  chief  agents  in  laying  the  foundations  of  our 
yet  more  material  civilisation.  The  monk  as  civilizer  is  a 
far  more  obvions  flgnre  in  history  then  the  monk  as  saint. 
Modem  Europe  is  a  monuuient  of  the  cloister. 

In  surveying  the  long  story  of  Christian  monasticism, 
at  least  four  great  periods  may  be  descried.  The  first  is 
connected  with  such  great  names  as  those  of  Basil. and 
Jerome ;  interest  is  centered  chiefly  in  tbe  countries  washed 
by  the  eastern  Mediterranean.  Gradually  the  ascetics  got 
complete  control  of  the  church.  This  was  against  their 
earliest  ideal.  The  first  monks  were  laymen,  and  Cassian* 
declares  that  their  desire  for  holy  orders  sometimes  pro- 
ceeds from  vainglory.  It  was  St.  Augustine  of  Hippo  who 
first  instituted  a  rule  of  priests  living  together  under  vows, 
such  as  in  later  years  would  be  called  regular  canons.  In 
the  Orthodox  Church  to-day  all  the  higher  ecclesiastics  are 
invariably  and  necessarily  monks.  Some  of  these  soli- 
taries carried  the  gospel  to  the  remotest  bounds  of  earth, 
particularly  those  who  are  formally  ranked  heretics.  Thna 
the  Nestorians  preached  with  great  snccess  in  China,  and 
thence  bronght  the  silkworm  to  Constantinople  as  early  as 
the  sixth  century.  But  within  the  Empire  itself  the  ob- 
ject of  the  monk  was  purely  self -centered :  by  withdrawing 
from  a  world  that  was  utterly  lost  he  hoped  to  save  bis 
soul.  That  can  hardly  be  deemed  a  very  useful  monasti- 
cism which  counted  as  its  very  noblest  .fruit  tbe  hermit 
St.  Simon  Stylites,  dwelling  on  the  top  of  his  column,  for- 
ever bending  bis  forehead  to  his  feet  and  holding  out  his 
arms  crosswise  in  prayer,  but  making  not  the  slimiest 
effort  to  support  a  falling  state  and  refusing  even  an  im- 
perial request  that  he  would  mediate  In  the  miserable 
squabbles  that  were  tearing  the  very  vitals  of  the  church. 
The  morose  Jerome,  writing  in  414  to  congratulate  a  Ro- 
man girl,  named  Demetries,  who  has  taken  a  vow  of  vir- 
'  Institutes,  book  zl.  chap.  xlv. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Christian  Monasticism  107 

ginity,  exclaims:  "Good  Jesas!  What  exultation  there 
was.  .  .  .  M;  words  are  too  weak.  Every  church  in  Africa 
danced  for  joy.  .  .  .  Italy  put  off  her  mourning  and  the 
ruined  walls  of  Bome  resumed  in  part  their  olden  splendor. 
.  .  .  You  would  fancy  the  Ooths  had  been  annihilated."  * 
Vet,  despite  this  somewhat  unpatriotic  view  of  the  loss  to 
civilization  by  Alaric's  sack  of  Rome,  Jerome  in  his  cell 
at  Bethlehem  was  doing  noble  service  to  mankind  by  trans- 
lating the  whole  of  the  Scriptures  into  the  vnlgar  tongue 
of  the  West.  That  in  other  ways  as  well  the  monks  did 
noble  things  for  knowledge  is  evident  from  the  enormous 
mass  of  M8S.  that  tbeir  libraries  have  shielded  from  de- 
struction. This  development  of  a  taste  for  learning  was 
undoubtedly  a  later  phase;  St.  Anthony,  the  chief  father 
of  christian  monks,  had  stoutly  declared  that  "  he  whose 
mind  is  in  health  has  no  need  of  letters."  The  disgraceful 
lawlessness  that  so  frequently  marked  the  early  councils 
of  the  church  must  also  be  credited  chiefly  to  the  wild  tur- 
bulence of  unlettered  monks,  frequently  more  willing  to 
anathematize  than  to  bless ;  so  much  more  ready  to  strike 
than  to  reason,  that,  as  Milman  says,'  their  bravery  often 
shamed  the  languid  patriotism  of  the  imperial  troops.  Nor 
can  it  reasonably  be  doubted  that  the  decline  and  fall  of 
the  Empire  was  largely  promoted  by  the  monasteries.  By 
dissuading  so  many  of  the  noblest  and  the  best  from  mar- 

'One  Hundred  Thirtieth  Letter  of  Jerome,  sect  6:  In  Nlcene  and 
Post-Nlcene  Fathers,  vol.  vl.  p.  263. 

'  Latin  CbrlBtUnltr.  vol.  1.  p.  344.  Ot  all  our  great  church  hlBto- 
rlane,  MUman  seems  to  be  the  fairest  to  the  monks,  with  Owatklu 
at  the  opposite  extreme.  Pew  really  great  works  on  the  history 
of  monaatlclsm  as  a  whole  have  been  written.  Hontalembert's 
splendid  book.  The  Honks  ot  tbe  West,  stands  nearly  alone.  Har- 
nack'B  Das  Mdnchthum  Is  the  least  satisfactory  of  all  his  works. 
On  the  other  hand,  much  has  been  written  about  particular  phase:] 
of  the  subject  by  members  ot  different  orders  themselves,  partic- 
ularly Cardinal  GasqueL  Some  excellent  English  antiquaries  and 
historians  are  devoting  themselves  very  largely  to  monaatlclsm  to- 
day, partlcularljr  Sir  WlDlam  St.  John  Hope,  Hamilton  Thompson, 
0.  O.  Coulton,  and  D.  H.  S.  Cranage. 


D.qtoeaOvGoOt^lc 


108  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jaa. 

riage,  they  difiaatrouBly  affected  the  population.'  Tcrtul- 
lian  seems  to  have  this  at  the  back  of  his  mind  when  he 
asserts,'  "  Our  numbers  are  burdensome  to  the  world, 
which  can  hardly  supply  us  from  its  natural  etemeuts," 
though  the  context  is  the  question  of  transmigration.  Am- 
brose makes  an  extremely  carious  and  interesting  defense, 
—  which  does  not  sound  very  plausible,  —  but  we  have  no 
means  of  verifying  his  facts ;  '  If  any  one  imagines  that 
by  the  existence  of  nuns  the  human  race  is  diminished  in 
number,  let  him  refiect  that  where  there  are  few  nuns 
there  are  still  fewer  men;  where  vows  of  virginity  are 
more  common,  tbere  the  population  is  larger.  Tell  me, 
how  many  nuns  are  professed  in  Alexandria  and  all  the 
East  each  year?  Here  in  the  West  we  have  fewer  births 
than  they  there  receive  vows  of  vii^nity ! '  * 

Except  by  such  as  regard  asceticism  as  something  noble 
in  itself,  this  earliest  period  of  monasticism  must  be  counted 
a  failure  on  the  whole.  It  has  hardly  even  yet  been  super- 
seded in  the  East.  Few  impartial  students  of  the  Ortho- 
dox Church  can  doubt  that  its  vast  hordes  of  ascetics  have 
done  at  least  as  much  to  destroy  as  to  build  it  up. 

But  a  very  different  judgment  indeed  is  demanded  by 
the  SECOND,  or  early  medlsval,  period,  when  even  the  stern- 
est critic  of  their  ideal  must  pay  a  tribute  of  admiration 
to  the  chief  rebuilders  of  the  world.*  During  the  sixth 
century  a  new  and  most  noble  figure  comes  upon  the  mo- 
nastic stage,  and  quite  unknowingly  onto  the  broad  arena 
of  the  whole  history  of  man,  —  Benedict  of  Nursia  (b.  480, 
(1.  54.^).  Bis  famous  rule  is  in  form  merely  an  effort  so  to 
regulate  the  life  of  monasteries  as  to  secure  to  their  in- 
mates that  peace  which  the  world  cannot  give.  But  in  the 

■The  prooto  tbat  dwindling  of  population  wu  a  large  factor  la 
the  decay  of  the  Empire  are  given  In  Seeler'a  Roman  Imperialism. 

*  De  Anima,  chap.  xxx. 

■Mllmao,  Htstorr  of  ChrlBtlanlty.  vol.  HI.  p.  219:  he  quotes  the 
passage  In  the  original  Latin,  but  does  not  supply  the  reference. 

■As  Charles  Klngsley,  In  his  <diapter  on  "The  Honk  a  CIvHIzer," 
In  The  Roman  and  the  Teuton. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Christian  Monaatidsm  109 

rebuilding  of  civilization,  which  was  the  glorious  task  of 
Christianity  after  the  hopeless  rain  of  the  Ehnpire  of  the 
West,  these  monks  took  a  mighty  pari:,  remained  perhaps 
the  chief  driving  force  in  life  till  the  Middle  Ages  had 
almost  mn  their  course.  Now  has  the  monk  become  the 
chief  actor  in  the  history  of  the  world,  the  most  prominent 
worker  in  well-nigh  all  the  varied  acta  of  man.  A  some- 
what misleading  impression  of  the  monk  is  apt  to  be  car- 
ried away  from  the  ordinary  histories  of  medieeval  times. 
Too  much  tribute  is  apt  to  be  paid  to  his  piety;  to  his 
learning,  at  least  all  that  it  deserves ;  but  of  his  noble  work 
as  the  practical  man  of  affairs,  raising  up  the  fabric  of  our 
Western  culture,  the  half  is  seldom  told. 

It  is  obvious  enough  that,  in  so  brief  a  paper  as  the 
present,  an  epitome  of  mediaeval  history  would  be  wholly 
out  of  place;  rather  let  the  monk  be  surveyed  in  the  midst 
of  his  innumerable  activities,  carrying  out  works  dreamed 
of  by  St.  Benedict  himself  about  as  much  as  the  present 
importance  of  this  land  was  conceived  by  those  who  first 
laid  down  the  feeble  foundations  of  little  cities  by  the  grey 
Atlantic  shore. 

And  first  of  the  monk  as  educator.  No  one  can  doubt 
that  it  was  chiefly  by  the  recluses  that  some  spark  of 
learning  was  kept  alight  during  the  long  and  dreary  years 
after  the  Western  Empire  fell,  and  before  some  measure 
of  new  flame  was  kindled  at  the  brilliant  court  of  Charles. 
That  revival  itself  was  lai^ly  monastic,  and  many  of 
the  great  Emperor's  advisers  were  monke,  particularly 
Alcnin  of  England,  whom  he  made  a  sort  of  minister  of 
education  and  also  abbot  of  Tours.  Alcnin  had  been  one 
of  the  products  of  a  most  brilliant  local  revival  during  the 
seventh  and  eighth  centuries  in  the  Northumbrian  convents, 
a  time  of  British  glory  that  centers  around  the  deathless 
name  of  Venerable  Bede,  the  first  great  English  scholar, 
the  ODly  real  historian  that  Saxon  England  knew.  This 
noble  culture  in  its  turn  was  inspired  chiefly  by  the  mis- 
sionary zeal  of  those  great  Irish  ascetics  whose  restless 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


110  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [JaD. 

energy  carried  them  over  the  sea  far  out  into  tlie  Atlantic 
and  to  the  lonely  volcanic  rocks  of  Iceland^  which  they 
vere  probably  the  first  of  men  to  see;  over  the  land  through 
the  fair  plains  of  France  to  the  mountain  valleys  of  Italy 
and  Switzerland.  Such  was  their  contribution  to  learning 
that  in  the  dark  ages  it  was  said  no  man  in  western  Eu- 
rope could  speak  Greek  who  was  uot  Irish-bom  or  at  least 
Irish-taught.  Musing  to-day  amid  the  severely  impressive 
ruins  of  Clonmacuoise  on  the  lonesome  peat  bogs  by  the 
Shannon,  where  the  wide  plain  of  rich  red  browns  rolls 
away  unbroken  to  the  distant  hills,  where  the  grey  chapels 
and  crosses  are  unshaded  save  by  a  single  ash  with  hardly 
any  leaves,  emphasizing  the  treeless  desolation  of  the  land, 
or  in  the  peaceful  Wicklow  valley  with  green  fields  and 
forests  sloping  to  a  chattering  brook,  where  the  tall  round 
tower  and  roofless  churches  of  Qlendalough  still  stand  by 
the  two  lakes  whose  still  waters  mirror  the  rock-strewn 
mountain  sides,  it  is  inspiring  to  refiect  that  Greek  liter- 
ature and  the  learning  of  the  past  were  here  preserved  in 
the  darkest  days  that  Europe  ever  knew  since  history  be- 
gan, and  that  students  from  all  Christendom  were  reading 
in  these  monastic  schools,  on  the  very  conflues  of  the  world, 
as  profitably  as  others  amid  all  the  glittering  splendor  of 
the  best  seats  of  Arab  learning  in  Mesopotamia  and  Egypt 
and  Spain.  Of  these  black  ages  it  is  not  too  much  to  say, 
Had  monks  perished,  then  learning  bad  gone  too. 

Arthur  Leach*  maintains  that,  at  any  rate  after  the 
eleventh  century,  the  monasteries  were  not  special  homes 
of  scholarship;  by  that  time, it  was  rather  secular  than 
regular  clerks  who  did  what  was  done  for  letters.  In  the 
universities  ascetics  did  not  bear  much  part  until  the  rise 
of  the  friars,  though  a  few  monks  were  constantly  in  resi- 
dence. At  Oxford  the  Benedictine  Order  maintained  Glou- 
cester-Hall, whose  buUdings  are  now  incorporated  into 
Worcester  College.  In  the  great  abbeys  whose  lovdy 
ruins  are  even  now  one  of  Europe's  greatest  glories,  there 
>  History  of  Winchester  Colleca. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Christian  Monagticism  111 

was  as  a  rule  but  scant  provision  for  books.  The  auperb 
House  of  Fountains,  vtiose  chnrch,  chapter  house,  and 
other  buildings  are  as  noble  monuments  as  Gothic  archi- 
tecture can  boast,  possessed  no  other  library  than  a  couple 
of  little  closets  at  either  side  of  the  chapter  door.  On  the 
other  hand,  copying  MS8.  was  a  moat  important  part  of 
tbe  duties  of  the  monks,  and  at  Chester  may  be  seen  the 
cells  in  which  they  sat  wbUe  thus  engaged,  along  two  clois- 
ter walks.  And  in  the  customs  of  the  college  at  Oxford 
and  Cambridge,  t>esides  other  ancient  European  seats  of 
learning,  many  relics  of  monastic  life  are  preserved  to  this 
very  hour.  Still,  on  the  whole,  the  impression  received 
from  Chaucer's  Prologue,  that  in  his  time  both  in  learning 
and  in  devotion  to  duty  the  secular  clerks  were  better  than 
the  regular,  is  confirmed  by  visitations  and  other  mediaeval 
records  as  to  the  condition  of  the  religious  houses. 

As  chroniclers  of  contemporary  events,  providing  much 
of  the  material  for  the  past  story  of  our  race,  monks  were 
exceedingly  prominent.  FacUitiee  for  such  work  were 
probably  better  in  a  large  abbey  than  in  any  other  place. 
And,  as  we  should  expect,  it  was  in  such  great  houses  as 
Westminster  and  St.  Albans  that  the  most  interesting  rec- 
ords were  written.  Tlieir  guest  houses  would  seldom  be 
empty.  In  the  rule  of  St.  Benedict  it  is  hospitably  or- 
dained :  "All  guests  who  come  shall  be  entertained  as 
though  they  were  Christ."  And  so  in  the  actual  course  of 
their  duties  some  of  the  monks  would  hear  what  was  going 
on,  wherever  Christians  went  and  came,  from  those  who 
had  themselves  borne  part.  The  chronicles  of  the  monks 
are  not  written,  as  a  rule,  from  any  narrow  point  of  view; 
a  man  like  Matthew  Paris  nTote  history  with  no  small 
charm. 

It  is  perhaps  in  the  capacity  of  statesman  that  the  monk 
has  least  received  his  due.  It  was  not  logical  that  the 
world  should  be  ruled  by  those  who  had  left  it  in  disgust, 
and  who,  in  the  Jndgment  of  their  greatest  lawgiver,  ought 
never  to  stray  beyond  tbe  pale  of  the  house  in  which  they 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


112  Bmiotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

had  taken  their  vows.  They  never  sought  worldly  power, 
at  least  in  earliest  times.  On  the  contrary,  many  of  them 
strenuously  resisted  when  it  was  forced  into  their  hands. 
But  when  (in  587)  Gregory  the  Great  was  compelled  to  sit 
in  the  papal  chair  in  very  lawless  days,  a  monk  became 
the  ruler  of  the  whole  Western  Church,  and  for  all  prac- 
tical purposes  king  of  Italy  too.  He  dealt  with  his  new 
duties  with  such  transcendent  skill  that  a  great  tradition 
was  established  in  the  world.  Monks  were  proved  to  be 
capable  of  handling  the  great  problems  of  that  day  bettra 
often  than  any  one  else.  The  cloister  had  evolved  an  eflB- 
ciency  that  the  world  without  did  not  know.  Bo  in  later 
years  it  did  not  seem  in  the  least  unfitting  that  twenty- 
nine  English  abbots  had  seats  in  the  House  of  Lords.  They 
were  sometimes  more  numerous  than  the  lay  peers,  and 
always  exceeded  the  bishops  in  number;  legislation  was 
largely  in  their  hands  when  that  famous  upper  house  was 
more  democratically  constituted  than  it  is  to-day,  and 
hereditary  peers  were  in  the  minority.  In  those  days  the 
cloister  was  by  far  the  most  obvious  ladder  by  which  a 
boy  brought  up  in  the  humblest  home  might  rise  to  be  one 
of  the  most  prominent  in  Europe.  For  within  the  cloister 
ability  was  far  more  valued  than  birth,  and  the  abbot  of 
a  great  house  ranked  with  the  proudest  nobles  in  the  land. 
Magna  Carta  was  written  in  the  Abbey  of  St.  Edmunds- 
bury.  The  self-government  of  the  monks  in  their  chapter 
contributed  very  largely  indeed  to  the  development  of  the 
free  institutions  of  England.  The  abbot  of  Westminster 
was  wont  to  invite  his  fellow  members  of  Parliament  to 
adjourn  from  the  king's  palace  of  St.  Stephen  to  the  chap- 
ter house  of  the  great  abbey  hard  by.  A  most  interesting 
description  of  the  government  of  a  large  bouse  is  given  in 
the  "  Clironicle  of  Jocelin  of  Brakelond," '  a  monk  of  Bury 
St.  Edmunds ;  and  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  procedure  of 
Parliament  was  largely  patterned  on  the  custom  of  the 
<  Carlyte'a  antborltir  for  Past  and  PreMnt 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Christian  Monasticism  113 

chapter  house  of  an  abbey.    Monasticism  made  a  splendid 
contribution  to  the  development  of  democratic  liberty. 

The  fact  that  they  had  taken  special  vowa  did  not  neces- 
sarily exempt  the  monks  from  the  sternest  duties  of  the 
world.  In  1118  a  few  poor  knights  in  Jerusalan  solemnly 
swore  to  protect  the  newly  won  Christian  state.  Largely 
under  the  inspiration  of  St.  Bernard  of  Glairvanz  (1090- 
1153),'  at  the  Council  of  Troyes,  they  adopted  the  Cister- 
cian nile.  The  houses  of  the  Knights  Templars  (as  they 
were  called  from  their  dwelling  in  the  Holy  City)  were 
barracks  and  convents  in  one;  Jacques  de  Vitry  describes 
them  as  "  rough  knights  on  the  battle  field,  pious  monks  in 
the  chapel;  formidable  to  tlie  enemies  of  Christ,  gentle- 
ness itself  to  his  friends."  The  suppreBsion  of  this  noble 
order  in  1312  is  one  of  the  most  mysterious  tragedies  of 
medieval  days.  But  other  soldier  monks  had  come  upon 
the  stage.  Perhaps  the  most  brilliant  feat  of  arms  that 
any  of  them  performed  was  the  heroic  defense  of  Malta  by 
the  Hospitalers  of  Bt.  John  of  Jerusalem,  when  in  1565, 
tinder  their  gallant  master,  La  Valette,  they  defied  the 
whole  force  of  the  Turks  when  their  power  was  at  the  full, 
and  did  much  to  make  the  Mediterranean  safe  for  the  ship- 
ping of  Christian  men.  This  order  still  exists  and  is 
Protestant  in  part;  as  in  the  case  of  the  ambulance  work 
of  St.  John.  And  at  Borne  it  yet  maintains  a  little  dilap- 
idated church,  and  a  garden  with  clipped  box  hedges,  high 
np  on  the  Aventiue  Hill.  Another  of  these  great  military- 
orders  was  to  do  less  noble  work.  The  Teutonic  Order,  so- 
called  from  the  nationality  of  most  of  its  knights,  nnder- 

'Tbls  remarkable  man,  "  last  of  tlie  Pathers."  was  a  great  leader 
in  organlzlns  tlie  ClBt«rclan  Order  as  a  protest  agatnet  the  laxity 
of  the  Benedictines.  He  greatly  rejoiced  to  find  some  practical  and 
very  necessary  work  that  the  monks  could  do.  sucb  aa  guarding: 
the  sepulcher  of  Christ.  Id  this  he  was  following  the  example  of 
St  Bernard  of  Menthon,  who  Id  962  built  a  hospice  amid  the  Al- 
pine snows  for  the  protection  of  pilgrims  and  other  traTelers.  Keep- 
ing open  communications  was  a  work  In  which  monks  took  a  noblei 
share. 

Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  801.    8  1 


D.qit.zeaOv  GoOt^ I.C 


114  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

took  to  guard  the  frontier  of  Christendom  against  pagan 
Lithuanian  and  Slav  hordes.  In  course  of  time  it  devel- 
oped the  strongest  standing  army  in  Europe,  and  with  the 
Hanseatic  League  it  Germanized  wide  lands  along  the 
Baltic  shore.  At  the  time  of  the  Reformation  its  grand 
master  was  a  member  of  the  Hohenzollem  hoase;  he  be> 
came  a  Protestant,  secularized  the  order,  and  practically 
put  l*russia  on  the  map.  Thus  the  military  tradition  of 
that  state,  and  much  of  its  spirit  too,  —  for  the  order  de- 
veloped a  most  ruthless  code,  —  is  directly  to  be  traced  to 
monasticism.  Verily  it  is  not  wholly  as  saint  that  tfie 
monk  has  written  himself  so  large  across  the  record  of 
mankind ! 

The  rule  of  St.  Benedict  provides  that  if  possible  a  mill, 
a  garden,  and  a  bakery  shall  exist  within  the  precincts  of 
every  monastery,  that  the  brethren  may  not  need  to  wan- 
der out  into  the  world.  In  devoting  themselves  with  en> 
ergy  to  agriculture  the  monks  were  carrying  out  both  in 
spirit  and  letter  the  ideal:  Laborare  est  orare.  The  cul- 
tivable area  of  Europe  was  very  largely  extended  by  the 
work  of  the  solitaries.  The  food  supply  of  England  during 
the  war  has  benefited  by  the  way  in  which  large  parts  of 
the  dreary  swamps  of  Norfolk  were  converted  into  fertile 
fields  by  the  monks  of  the  great  abbey  of  St.  Benet,  Holm. 
The  cooperative  farming  of  the  monks  was  a  great  improve- 
ment on  the  crude  strip-cultivation  of  the  feudal  manor, 
and  there  was  hardly  a  convent  in  the  open  country  that 
did  not  benefit  the  agriculture  of  its  district.  When  the 
estates  of  the  monasteries  were  rented  they  were  generally 
good  landlords.  Ko  serious  disputes  disturbed  the  good 
relations  between  the  monks  and  their  peasant  neighbors. 
Monks  were  generally  popular  in  the  country,  however  dif- 
ferent was  the  case  in  towns,' 

'Where  constant  disputes  as  to  Jurfsdlctlon  imd  prlvHegeB  caused 
almost  endless  bickerings.  At  places  like  Norwich  and  Staerbum, 
town-  and  cowl-riots  were  sometlmeB  exceedingly  serious.  At  Bury 
St  Edmunds  may  be  seen  to  this  day  tbe  monastic  gateway  wltb 


joovGoot^lc 


1919]  Christian  MonasticUm  115 

Possesfliiig  wide  lands,  especially  among  the  beautiful 
Yorkshire  dales,  the  Cistercians  became  great  traders  in 
wool,  the  chief  commerce  of  medieeval  England,  whose  im- 
portance is  attested  to  this  very  day  by  the  Lord  Chancel- 
lor's woolsack  seat.  It  was  sent  for  manufacture  to  the 
cities  of  Flanders,  where  its  profits  helped  to  raise  those 
glorious  structures  so  wantonly  destroyed  in  the  war.  That 
the  Cistercians  were  keen  men  of  business  there  can  be  no 
doubt  at  all.  When  Fulk  of  Neuilly  reproached  Bicbarcl 
Lionheart  with  having  three  daughters  whose  names  were 
Luxury,  Oreed,  and  Pride,  for  whom  husbands  should  be 
found,  the  King  retorted  on  the  priest  that  the  spouse  of 
Luxury  should  be  the  prelates  of  holy  church ;  of  Pride,  the 
Knights  Templars;  and  Greed  should  most  appropriately 
be  wedded  to  the  monks  of  the  Cistercian  Order  !^  There 
was  a  tinge  of  ingratitude  in  the  last  reference,  seeing  that, 
only  three  years  before,  the  Cistercians  had  had  to  con- 
tribute a  whole  year's  wool  toward  the  ransom  of  the 
King.* 

Excellent  use  was  made  of  the  vast  wealth  of  the  mon- 
asteries in  erecting  those  glorious  churches  that  are  the 
greatest  legacy  we  hare  received  from  medieval  years.  Id 
England  half  the  cathedrals  were, the  work  of  monastic 
hands,  but  those  of  the  Continent  were  raised  by  the  laity. 
Still  everywhere  church  architecture  was  influenced  chiefly 
by  the  lavish  examples  set  by  the  monks. 

All  this  world  activity  of  the  ascetics  was  in  the  interest 
of  European  civilization*;  but  beyond  any  peradventure 
loopbolee  bdlnd  tbe  statues,  eo  that  when  the  town  attacked,  the 
saints  could  be  pushed  down  onto  the  beads  '  ot  the  assailants  with 
fllsbta  of  arrows  to  follow! 

'Flores  HlBtorlarum,  1197  a.d.  (Rolls  Series),  vol.  IL  pp.  116-11? 
(from  Hoveden). 

'Hattbew  Paris,  Chronica  Malora  (Rolls  Series),  rot.  11.  p.  399. 

*  It  1b  remarkable  that,  during  tbe  middle  ages  of  Japan,  monks 
took  a  ratber  similar  part  as  chroniclers,  fanners,  artists,  traders, 
Midlers,  and  sometimes  politicians.  Tbere  Is  also,  at  any  rate,  a 
superficial  resemblance  In  tbe  planning  of  monastic  buildings  round 
cloister  courts. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


116  Bihliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

it  was  utterly  destructive  of  the  type  of  character  that 
Benedict  desired.  Long  before  the  Reformation  was  in 
eight,  the  monk  was  apt  to  be  far  less  a  saint  than  a  prac- 
tical man  of  affairs  living  in  a  pleasant  cluh.  For  archte- 
ological  evidence  is  conclusive  that  the  dwellings  of  monks 
were  more  comfortable,  on  the  whole,  than  the  contem- 
porary homes  of  the  laity.  No  thirtewith-  or  fonrteentfa- 
century  castle  can  compare,  in  the  convenience  of  its 
internal  arrangements,  with  the  domestic  buildings  at 
Fountains  or  Fumess.  This  so  preyed  on  the  mind  of 
the  noble  St.  Francis  of  Assisi  that  he  was  led  to  the 
founding  of  an  ascetic  order  of  a  different  type,  thus  all 
unconsciously  starting  the  third  period  in  the  history  of 
Christian  monasticism,  that  of  the  friars.  St.  Benedict's 
stem  prohibition  of  monks  owning  anything  at  all  had 
been  rendered  farcical  by  the  fact  that  the  orders  possessed 
a  quarter  of  the  soil  of  western  Europe.  So  the  friars  were 
to  be.  so  poor  that  they  should  need  to  beg  their  bread; 
their  orders  should  give  them  nothing,  not  even  homes. 
Scorning  merely  to  save  their  souls  and  leave  the  world 
apart,  the  friars  were  to  minister  to  the  outcast  and  beg- 
gars, to  seek  out  the  classes  that  the  parish  clergy  hardly 
touched.  Success  was  immediate  and  very  great.  The 
cheerful  barefooted  Franciscans  were  everywhere  enthusi- 
astically received.  Within  a  few  years  of  1208,  about  which 
time  their  order  began,  three  others  sprang  op  with  much 
the  same  plans  and  ideals.  The  Order  of  St.  Dominic 
dates  from  1216;  the  Austin  Friars  (to  whose  ranks  Lu- 
ther belonged)  claimed  the  great  name  of  St.  Augustine 
of  Hippo,  and  the  Carmelites,  not  to  be  outdone,  asserted 
they  were  founded  by  Elijah,  who  seems  to  be  the  only 
Old  Testament  character  to  be  reckoned  a  Christian  saint.* 
The  first  generations  of  friars  insisted  upon  worshiping  in 
wooden  huts;  they  were  everywhere  immensely  respected. 
But  success  brought  its  well-nigh  inevitable  result.  Within 
'  Ab  patron  of  the  Flying  Coitb  of  the  onny  of  the  late  Rnaatan 
Empire,  he  aeema  to  hare  b«en  a  varr  qualified  ancceaa. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


191!>]  Christian  Monasticism  117 

a  century  they  were  celebrating  in  maguiflceot  minsters 
and  charging  large  sams  to  laity  who  wished  to  be  bnried 
in  their  holy  soil.  The  old  prohibition  of  their  orders  own- 
ing property  did  somethiDg  for  the  English  law  of  trusts! 
The  fact  that,  unlike  the  monks,  they  were  able  to  perform 
paiMjchial  duties  and  to  receive  fees  that  should  hare  gone 
to  others,  made  them  loathed  of  the  parish  priests.  But 
gradually  the  distinction  between  friar  and  monk  became 
attended  to  less  and  iess;  by  the  time  of  the  Reformation 
it  was  almost  entirely  lost. 

What  may  be  called  the  fourth  period  in  the  long  story 
of  Christian  monasticiam  was  inaugurated  when,  on  the 
Feast  of  the  Assumption  in  1534,  Ignatius  Loyola  and  his 
little  band  knelt  together  in  the  chapel  on  Montmartre, 
and  constituted  the  Society  of  Jesus.  The  Middle  Ages 
had  run  their  course.  The  Beformation  was  sweeping  the 
world.  A  new  era  had  begun,  and  neither  monk  nor  friar 
was  very  well  equipped  for  the  new  battle  with  Protestant- 
ism. The  old  democracy  was  cast  aside,  a  military  organ- 
ization was  adopted.  No  Jesuit  convent  ever  possessed  a 
chapter  house.  The  members  of  the  new  order  were  not  to 
deliberate,  but  simply  to  .obey.  At  one  time  or  another 
they  have  ruled  great  kingdoms,  particularly  in  Austria 
and  Poland,  where  our  present  problems  are  to  some  de- 
gree the  legacy  of  what  they  did.  One  of  their  original 
members,  Francis  Xavier,  realized  nearly  four  hundred 
years  ago  the  latent  powers  of  Japan.  Their  paternal 
work  among  the  Indians  of  Paraguay  is  one  of  the  few 
bright  chapters  in  the  story  of  Latin  intercourse  with  the 
aborigines  of  America.  Their  scientific  and  educational 
works  are  known  throughout  the  earth.  Their  artistic 
taste  carried  the  barocco  style  to  nearly  every  conntry  of 
Europe.  The  great  men  of  the  earlier  orders  were  often 
apt  to  place  the  world  above  the  church ' ;  much  of  their 

'The  great  ehancetlor,  Tbomaa  Wolser,  cardinal  and  arebblsbop 
as  well  as  Benedictine  abbot,  waa  of  a  very  Becular  spirit,  almost 
anti-«lerica]  at  times.  No  tendency  of  the  kind  ever  showed  itself 
among  the  Jesuits. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


118  Bibliotheca  Sacra 

work  would  have  been  strongly  reprobated  hj  tboee  whose 
rules  they  were  supposed  to  obey.  But,  in  striking  con- 
trast, perhaps  no  institution  of  the  earth  has  ever  quite 
so  exactly  (ulfiUed  its  founder's  desires  as  the  much- 
diacnssed  Society  of  Jesus.  Many  other  orders  have  been 
founded  in  the  Church  of  Borne  and  during  the  Laudian 
rerival  and  later  in  the  Church  of  England  too,  but  their 
history  hardly  forms  a  iiart  of  the  record  of  the  world  at 
large.  The  days  when  the  earth  could  be  ruled  by  monks 
have  forever  passed  away. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


CRITICAL  NOTES 
WHAT  IS  A  DBMOCRACT? 

According  to  a  prominent  daily  newspaper  in  the  Mid- 
dle West,  a  reverend  professor,  in  a  college  under  Chris- 
tian auspices,  has  gravely  and  publicly  proposed  to  amend 
the  Lord's  Prayer  by  substituting  for  "  thy  kingdoia  come  " 
the  words  "  thy  democracy  come."  Devout  Christians  will 
probably  resent  this  proposal  to  transform  the  Lord's  King- 
dom and  to  mutilate  the  Lord's  Prayer.  Instead  of  giv- 
ing tongue  to  this  resentment,  it  may  be  worth  while  for 
Christians  to  consider  what  is  involved  in  tlie  proposed 
transformation.  If  accomplished,  would  it  involve  any 
fundamental  change  in  our  Lord's  kingdom?  Is  this  pro- 
posal only  a  bit  of  popular  clap-trap?  In  order  intelli- 
gently and  correctly  to  answer  these  questions,  we  must 
determine  what  a  democracy  is;  and  in  what  respects  it 
differs  from  a  kingdom. 

The  oft-qnoted  saying  of  President  Lincoln  at  Gettys- 
burg by  many  is  regarded  as  a  brief,  but  well-nigh  perfect, 
definition  of  democracy.  It  is  a  government  of  the  people, 
for  the  people,  by  the  people.  This  definition  needs  to  be 
defined.  The  phrase  "  government  of  the  people "  is  am- 
biguous. It  may  mean  a  government  over  the  people.  It 
may  mean  government  on  the  part  of  the  people.  This 
second  possible  meaning  is  substantially  that  of  the  phrase 
"  government  by  the  people."  We  may,  therefore,  accept 
the  former  of  the  two  meaniugn  as  the  correct  one,  and  de- 
scribe a  democracy  as  a  government  over  all  the  people, 
for  the  benefit  of  all  the  people,  by  the  people  themselves. 
The  word  "all"  is  purposely  left  out. of  the  last  clause  be- 
cause a  government  by  all  the  people  in  any  extensive  and 
complex  community  is  impracticable  if  not  absurd.  "The 
people"  regarded  as  rulers  must  be  limited.  Immature 
children,  mental  and  moral  imbeciles,  criminals,  tramps, 
persistent  idlers  of  every  class,  must  be  excluded  from 
the  exercise  of  governmental  functions.  The  people  who 
really  exercise  these  functions  must  be  limited  to  the  in- 
telligent, industrious,  and  moral  men;  and,  if  any  one 
chooses  so  to  believe  and  say,  to  women  who  possess  these 
characteristics. 

Let  us,  then,  admit  that  the  only  practicable  democracy 
is  a  government  in  which  the  ruling  functions  are  exer- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


120  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

cinetl  by  intelligent,  moral,  and  iadustrious  men  and  women 
who  contribute  by  their  mental  and  manual  labor,  and  by 
their  accumulated  wealth,  to  tbe  good  order  of  society  and 
to  the  welfare  of  all  the  people.  Theee  constitute  the  only 
rational  detnos,  to  whom  alone  can  authority  to  rule  be 
Bafely  and  wisely  committed. 

It  is  also  evident  that  even  in  such  a  democracy  all  the 
functions  of  government  cannot  be  exercised  by  all  the 
individuals  who  comitose  the  demos.  These  functions  must 
be  distributed :  to  a  few  more,  to  the  many  less.  If  the 
demos  were  on  an  island,  separated  from  the  rest  of  the 
world;  if  it  were  composed  of  a  few  men  and  women  of 
about  the  same  measure  of  intelligence,  experience,  moral- 
ity, industry,  and  physical  strength,  it  might  be  practicable 
to  confer  on  each  and  all,  all  ruling  functions.  Even  under 
these  very  exceptional  conditions,  such  an  attempt  to  se- 
cure a  pure  democracy  might  be  found  by  no  means  to  be 
the  best  government  which  the  islanders  could  devise.  Ex- 
pand this  demos  to  any  considerable  extent;  bring  in  oth- 
ers less  developed  in  physical,  mental,  and  moral  powers, 
and  the  exercise  of  all  governmental  functions  by  all  the 
individuals  of  the  demos  would  be  impracticable;  or,  if 
for  a  time  found  to  be  practicable,  would  be  unjust:  un- 
just, because  of  the  unequal  abilities  of  the  individuals; 
impracticable,  because  of  the  numbers  involved,  and  be- 
cause of  the  number  and  diversity  of  the  governmental 
functions  to  be  performed.  It  may  be  admitted  that  the 
primary  power  of  government,  expressed  in  voting,  may 
be  placed,  in  these  usually  expanded  conditions,  in  the 
hands  of  the  demos,  each  individual  having  one  vote.  But 
the  secondary  powers  or  functions  must  be  exercised  by 
comparatively  a  few,  who  derive  their  just  authority  to 
act  as  rulers  from  the  many.  TIius  democracy  becomes 
necessarily  a  combination  of  democracy  and  oligarchy. 

For  an  extended  discussion  of  this  subject,  reference  is 
here  made  to  an  English  book  on  this  subject  by  W.  H. 
Malloek,  entitled  "Limits  of  Pure  Democracy"  (1918), 
to  which  the  present  writer  acknowledges  his  great  in- 
debtedness. 

In  actual  practice  it  makes  little  difference  how  this 
combination  of  democracy  and  oligarchy  is  developed  or 
proportioned.  It  began  in  the  family.  The  father  was  an 
autocrat  ruling,  according  to  his  own  will,  his  wife  and 
children.     It  may  be  admitted  that  the  wife,  even  from 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1»1»]  CHtical  Notes  121 

the  beginning,  influenced  her  husband's  opinions  and  to 
some  extent  determined  his  conduct.  As  eoon  as  the  sons 
became  men  the  father's  autocracy  became  an  oligarchy. 
Clans  and  tribes  emerged  from  families.  The  chief  of  the 
tribe  derived  his  riglit  to  the  ezen^ise  of  goTemmental 
functions  over  all  from  his  own  inherited  and  acquired 
mental  and  physical  power,  and  from  the  consent  of  the 
heads  of  families  who  constituted  in  those  times  and  com- 
munities the  real  demos.  Contiguous  tribes  were  merged 
into  a  nation  or  state  usually  by  conquest;  or,  at  times,  by 
the  agreement  of  the  tribal  chiefs.  In  the  former  case  we 
have  what  may  be  regarded  or  called  an  autocratic  king 
or  emperor ;  in  the  latter,  a  constitutional  ruler.  Id  either 
case  there  is  an  oligarchy  sustained  by  a  demos;  because 
no  single  ruler,  autocratic  or  constitutional,  can  impose 
his  will,  and  exercise  the  functions  of  government,  unless 
his  decrees  are  sustained  by  the  demos,  and  executed  by 
subordinates  appointed  either  by  the  people  or  by  himself. 

The  development  of  modem  democracies,  so  called,  con- 
sists lai^ly  in  the  enlargement  of  the  demos  by  extending 
to  more  of  the  people  the  right  to  vote ;  and  by  the  trans- 
fer of  autocratic  powers  from  a  single  person  to  a  num- 
ber of  persona,  who  really  constitute  an  oligarchy.  Thus, 
in  great  states,  the  real  distinction  between  a  constitu- 
tional empire,  a  kingdom,  a  republic,  or  a  democracy,  dis- 
appears. The  so-called  British  Empire,  the  Kingdom  of 
Great  Britain,  the  French  Republic,  and  the  United  States 
of  North  America  are  all  based  on  the  consent  of  the 
demon.  They  are  all  ruled  by  comparatively  a  few  men. 
They  are  all  expressions  of  democracies  combined  with 
oligarchies.  Even  the  Beferendum  and  the  Initiative  are 
only  devices  to  enlai^  somewhat  the  legislative  functions 
of  the  demos.  Most  of  the  legislative  functions,  and  all  of 
the  judicial  and  executive  functions  of  government,  must 
continue  to  be  exercised  by  the  few. 

We  find  the  same  mixture  of  democracy  and  oligarchy 
when  the  theories  of  the  socialists,  even  on  a  small  scale, 
are  reduced  to  practice.  The  socialists  tell  us  that  a  de- 
mocracy is  a  government  in  which  every  man  shall  have 
an  eqnal  voice  in  the  afTairs  of  his  country  in  virtue  of  his 
manhood  alone.  If  this  doctrine  were  effectively  applied, 
the  government  so  constituted  would  he  determined  and 
controlled  by  the  abilities  and  votes  of  men  and  women 
below  the  average  man  or  woman.    This  conclusion  is  re- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


122  Bibliotheca  Bacra  [Jan. 

pndiated  b;  many  socialists  who  would  ezclade  from  the 
demos  citizens  very  low  in  the  scale  of  morals  and  intel- 
ligence. The  socialists  claim  that  these  are  few  in  num- 
bers and  are  negligible  in  practice.  Eren  if  this  claim  is 
admitted ;  if  an  average  somewhat  higher  than  the  ability 
of  the  lower  section  could  be  reached ;  if  this  higher  aver- 
age could  attain  to  the  intelligence  of  the  average  man  and 
woman  of  the  demos  taken  in  its  entirety  as  defined  by  the 
socialists,  a  government  thus  constituted  would  not  be  a 
sane  or  safe  democracy,  pure  and  simple.  The  reason  is 
apparent.  Either  the  votes  of  any  number  of  average  men, 
or  of  men  below  the  average,  would  counteract  the  votes 
of  any  smaller  number  of  superior,  wiser,  and  better  men, 
which  would  not  be  good  for  all  the  people  of  the  country; 
or  the  smaller  number  of  superior  men  would  effectively 
control  the  votes  of  the  larger  numl)er  of  their  inferiors. 

An  illustration  of  this  second  alternative,  indeed  of  both, 
may  be  found  in  our  own  country  during  what  is  called 
the  Iteconstruction  Period.  In  the  Southern  States  the 
demos  was  increased  by  the  introduction  of  all  grown 
negro  men.  For  a  time,  in  r^ons  not  governed  by  the 
Federal  army,  there  was  more  or  less  anarchy.  Bnt  soon 
an  oligarchy  of  white  men  was  formed,  resulting  in  the 
exclusion,  or  the  control,  of  many  negro  votes.  This  oli- 
garchy preferred  to  be  governed  by  bayonets  in  the  hands 
of  intelligent  white  men  rather  thau  by  ballots  in  the  hands 
of  ignorant  negroes.  A  more  recent  illustration  is  afforded 
on  a  more  extended  scale  in  Russia.  The  revolution  which 
overthrew  the  Czar  and  his  Bureaucracy  did  not  at  first 
cause  a  complete  break-up  of  the  governmental  organiza- 
tion. The  Duma  was  in  session.  The  heads  of  the  great  de- 
partments of  the  government  were  in  office.  The  army  was 
organized  and  fairly  well  disciplined.  Unfortunately  there 
was  at  Petrograd  a  socialistic  organization,  dominated  by 
a  few  men,  at  heart  oligarchs,  who  were  in  sympathy  with 
the  extreme  forms  of  German  and  other  socialisms.  These 
Russian  socialists,  thus  animated,  organized  a  second  re- 
volt both  among  citizens  and  soldiers.  They  proposed  a 
democracy  pure  and  simple.  The  outcome  has  been  an 
autocratic  oligarchy.  So  far  it  has  issued  in  anarchy,  ex- 
cept as  it  has  been  controlled  by  the  German  Government. 
The  real  Russian  demos  has  had  neither  the  opportunity 
nor  the  ability  to  manifest  its  power. 

When  the  smaller  socialistic  bodies  are  examined.  Trade 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  CHtical  Xotes  123 

CniooB  and  the  like,  we  find  a  Bimilar  set  of  conditions. 
While,  nominally,  these  organizations  are  pare  democra- 
cies, in  fact  the  power  of  the  many,  with  at  least  their  im- 
plied consent,  is  exercised  b;  the  few.  The  few  influence 
and  ofteu  control  the  rotes  of  the  many.  Sometimes  the  - 
oligarchy  thus  emerging  becomes  an  oligarch  who  plays 
the  part  of  an  autocratic  king.  His  will  is  law.  His  fel- 
low democrats  accept  it  as  such. 

We  may  now  consider  the  proposed  substitution  of  a 
divine  democracy  for  a  divine  kingdom.  The  important 
questions  are:  What  aubstantial  change  would  be  effected? 
What  gain  would  be  secured  by  the  substitution  if  it  conld 
be  effected? 

It  must  be  understood  that  the  present  discussion  pro- 
ceeds from  a  standpoint  presumably  very  different  from 
that  of  the  reverend  professor  who  has  lioldly  and  publicly 
advocated  the  substitution.  He  would  most  probably  rule 
out  the  use  of  the  word  "  divine."  *  He  would  probably 
assert  that  Jesus  was  only  a  man,  though  a  very  great  and 
a  very  good  man;  that  his  kingdom,  or  God's  kingdom  on 
earth,  when  it  came,  would  be  a  human  kingdom,  his  de- 
mocrac}-  only  a  human  democracy.  Be  this  as  it  may,  the  pres- 
ent writer  regards  God's  government  on  earth,  over  which 
his  Only  Begotten  and  Well  Beloved  Bon  is  directly  the 
Bupreme  Ruler,  as  a  divine  government,  whether  called  an 
empire,  a  kingdom,  or  a  democracy;  and  it  is  now  proposed 
to  show  that,  like  all  other  governments  known  to  men,  it 
is  a  combination  of  democracy  and  oligarchy. 

It  would,  indeed,  be  most  presumptaons  for  any  man 
to  predict  what  are  to  be  the  details  of  Christ's  Kingdom 
when  it  is  established  in  its  final  and  glorious  condition 
on  earth.  All  intelligent  and  devout  Christians  believe 
that  then,  as  now,  and  as  it  ever  has  been  since  God's  peo- 
ple on  earth  were  organized  into  an  outward  and  visible 
body,  Christ  will  be  its  autocratic  King,  save  as  his  autoc- 
racy is  derived  from  his  Father,  the  Eternal  and  Infinite 
God.  This  delegated  autocracy  he  claimed.  All  power  in 
heaven  and  on  earth  is  his  by  divine  right.  We  may 
reasonably  infer  from  the  history  of  the  past  that  many 
governmental  functions  will  be  committed  to  subordinate 
officers;  that  his  final  and  glorious  Kingdom  will  be  a  com- 
bination of  oligarchy  and  democracy.  As  intimated  above, 
there  is  no  disposition  on  the  part  of  the  present  writer 
to  dogmatize  as  to  this.  The  records  of  the  past  at  least 
t  it. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


124  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

Certainly  from  the  days  of  Abraham,  all  down  the  a^ies, 
the  Lord  hits  been  the  autocratic  King  of  His  People, 
whether  called  out,  from  among  the  Qentiles  or  descended 
from  the  Father  of  the  Faithful.  Yet  from  the  l>eginning, 
heads  of  families,  elders,  judges,  priests,  and  kings,  ac- 
cording to  the  Lord's  appointment  and  with  the  consent 
of  the  people,  exercised  governmental  functions.  When 
the  bounds  of  Judaism  were  enlarged ;  when  the  Congrega- 
tion of  the  Lord,  which  nnder  the  New  Testament  we 
call  the  Church,  started  on  its  world-wide,  Christ-given, 
mission ;  amid  all  its  vicissitudes  and  corruptions,  as  well 
as  when  purest  and  most  faithful,  the  same  combination 
of  oligarchy  and  democracy  appears.  Christ  still  roles 
over  the  Congregation  of  the  Lord,  the  Church.  His  re- 
vealed will  is  its  law.  Yet  he  rules  on  earth  by  means  of 
subordinates  whose  authoritj-  is,  indeed,  derived  from  him; 
but  which  is  and  must  be  fustained,  under  present  condi- 
tions, by  the  Christian  drmns  or  people  who  elect  them, 
and  who  regard  them  as  divinely  appointed. 

The  Roman  Church,  among  all  the  Churches,  most  re- 
sembles an  empire.  In  its  government  the  democratic  ele- 
ment is  apparently  insignificant;  yet  the  presence  and 
power  of  this  element  are  essential  to  its  existence  as  an 
empire.  The  oligarchic  element  is  more  conspicuous.  The 
Pope,  though  regarded  as  the  vicegerent  of  the  Lord,  would 
be  impotent  without  his  subordinate  officers,  appointed  di- 
rectly or  indirectly  by  himself. 

Evidently  the  Episcopal  and  Presbyterian  Churches  are 
both  democratic  and  oligarchic  in  their  respective  forms  of 
government.  This  is  true  in  the  case  of  the  C/Ongrega- 
tioual  churches,  supposed  by  many  to  be  pure  democra- 
cies. Their  congregational  assemblies,  in  which  every 
communicant  in  good  and  regular  standing  has  one  vote 
and  so  appears  to  have  equal  power  with  each  of  his 
brethren,  are  to  a  considerable  extent  controlled  by  their 
elders  and  deacons,  to  say  nothing  of  other  members  of 
unusual  ability  and  wealth  whose  influence  controls  the 
votes  of  many.  It  is  of  course  inevitable  that  the  general 
policies  of  the  Congregational  churches  are  determined  by 
delegated  bodies. 

It  thus  appears  that  church  government  takes  on  the 
various  forms  in  which  civil  government  appears.  All  of 
these  forms  are  combinations  of  democracy  and  oligarchy 
in  varying  proportions.  As  democracies,  the  power  of  gov- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  12K 

emment  inheres  primarily  in  a  demos,  compoeed  of  men 
and  women  who  make  an  intelligent  and  credible  confee- 
sion  of  faith  in  JeauB,  the  Christ,  as  Saviour  and  Lord^ 
and  who  by  their  service  and  money  agree  to  execute  his 
Great  Commission.  Ah  oligarchies,  certain  of  these  con- 
fessors, delegated  directly  or  indirectly  by  the  demos,  in 
some  churches  few  in  number,  direct  the  work  committed 
to  his  people  by  Christ  their  King. 

We  may  therefore  conclude  that  the  reverend  professoHa 
proposal  to  transform  the  Lord's  Kingdom  into  a  democ- 
racy pure  and  simple,  is  a  silly  attempt  to  rob  our  Baviour 
of  his  divine  right  to  be  the  Ood-appointed  King  of  his  peo- 
ple, having  authority  to  announce  to  them  facte  which  are 
real,  to  give  them  doctrines  which  they  must  believe,  laws 
which  they  must  obey,  ordinances  which  they  must  observe, 
and  a  glorious  destiny  which  they  are  to  enjoy.  If  such  a 
proposal  could  be  realized,  it  would  turn  the  church  into 
a  mere  human,  volnntary,  go-as-you-please  society,  having 
the  right  to  believe,  to  confess,  and  to  do  what  it  pleased. 
It  would  compel  in  every  case  a  minority,  however  large 
and  intelligent,  to  submit  to  a  majority,  however  small, 
unintelligent,  and  disloyal.  The  only  alternative  left  to 
the  minority  would  be  to  secede  and  to  form  anotber  so- 
called  church ;  which,  in  turn,  as  a  pure  democracy,  would 
run  a  similar  course.  The  final  outcome  would  be  neither 
a  kingdom,  nor  a  democracy,  nor  an  oligarchy.  Bather  it 
would  be,  as  civil  government  now  is  in  Russia,  a  rdigious 
anafchy,  having  Despair  as  its  god;  rather  than  a  divine 
government  over  a  free  and  consenting  people,  sustained 
amid  all  the  vicissitudes  of  earthly  life  by  a  great  and 
blessed  Hope. 

E.   C.   CklBDON 

8t.  Louis,  Missouri 

THE  THBORT  OP  A  PINITH  AND  DEVELOPING  DEITY 

Thb  object  of  my  article  in  the  April  number  of  The 
American  Journal  of  Theology,  1918,  was  to  elicit  discus- 
sion among  theologians  of  Bergson's  proposal  (if  he  did 
propose  it)  that  Ood  by  nature  is  a  Becoming.  Of  course, 
I  should  not  have  discussed  the  subject  at  all  if  the  pro- 
posal had  not  attracted  me,  but  I  am  far  from  supposing 
that  it  has  been  thoroughly  explored  or  is  in  a  condition 
to  be  definitely  accepted  or  rejected.    And,  however  flat- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


126  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan, 

tering  it  may  be,  I  am  not  at  all  inclined  to  accept  Dr. 
Gruber's  opinion  (in  the  article  to  whicli  I  wish  to  call 
a  moment's  attention)  that  "from  the  viewpoint  of  such 
as  may  accept  unchallenged  its  [the  proposal's]  nnderly- 
ing  premises,  it  would  seem  that  its  conclusions  should 
leave  the  matter  of  God's  supposedly  necessary  limitations 
no  longer  an  open  question." 

The  article  under  review  is  that  written  by  the  Rev,  L. 
F.  Gruber,  D.l).,  of  St.  Paul,  and  published  in  the  Bib- 
LiOTUECA  Sacra  for  October,  1918,  under  the  title,  "The 
Theory  of  a  Finite  and  Developing  Deity  Examined." 
Dr.  Gruber  is  quite  right  in  saying  that  "  it  is  precisely 
in  the  premises  that  we  must  differ  from  its  [the  theory's] 
advocates."  He  should  therefore  have  devoted  his  atten- 
tion to  those  premises ;  but  this  he  does  not  do  at  all.  His 
final  outcome  is  merely  this,  that  upon  his  premises,  the 
premises  of  an  a  priori  philosophy,  and  by  the  methods  of 
deductive  logic,  the  theory  in  question  must  be  rejected, 
and  the  static  view  of  God  maintained.  We  admit  this 
without  question,  and  so  would  all  others  who  may  advo- 
cate the  new  theory.  Our  principal  objection  is  to  that 
very  philosophy  and  to  its  premises.  It  is  of  such  things 
that  .Tames  is  writing,  in  the  passage  I  quoted  from  him, 
when  he  says :  "  What  is  deduction  of  these  metaphysical 
attributes  but  a  shuffling  and  matching  of  pedantic  diction- 
ary adjectives,  aloof  from  morals,  aloof  from  human  needs, 
something  that  might  be  worked  out  from  the  mere  word 
'  Ood '  by  one  of  those  logical  machines  of  wood  and  brass 
which  recent  ingenuity  has  contrived,  as  well  as  by  a  man 
of  flesh  and  blood?  They  have  the  trail  of  the  serpent  over 
them."  Orthodox  theologians  should  take  this  sentence  to 
heart  and  open  their  eyes  to  the  fact  that  the  revolt  against 
their  theology  is  not  against  trifles  or  details,  but  against 
the  very  substance  of  it. 

To  cite  a  single  example,  out  of  many  possible  ones, 
we  read  (p.  490)  r  "somewhere  there  must  also  be  an 
unchanginn,"  a  statement  fop  which  no  proof  is  offeretl 
save  a  parenthetical  clause  on  the  following  page,  "  as  in- 
deed the  very  word  change  would  seem  to  imply."  Tbea, 
of  course,  our  contention  falls,  for  we  have  suggeateii  that 
perhaps  God  Himself,  the  Ultimate,  is  constantly  in  pro- 
cess of  development.  But  are  we  to  be  refuted,  after  all 
the  study  and  discussion  of  such  a  volume  as  the  "  Crea- 
tive Evolution,"  by  a  sentence  which  without  argument 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  127 

assumes  the  point  tbe  vriter  wiehes  to  prove?  That  word 
assume,  Dr.  Oruber  does  not  seem  to  understand,  for  he 
charges  modem  science,  after  all  the  labor  which  has 
led  to  the  organization  of  the  generalization  of  energy  and 
tbe  unity  of  force,  with  assuming  "  a  unified  force  as  the 
impelling  cause"  of  the  world  (p.  480)  !  The  experiential 
philosophy  assumes  nothing  except  the  possibility  of  man's 
arriving  at  truth. 

I  am  not  snre  but  that  Dr.  Qruber  may  be  right  in 
limiting  Wundt's  principle  of  tbe  increase  of  spiritual 
strength  to  finite  spiritual  energy,  though  be  does  not  cite 
anything  from  Wundt  upon  the  point,  but  brings  in  one  of 
his  own  principles  to  justify  himself,  "  surely  an  infinite 
spiritual  entity  could  not  become  more  infinite"  (p.  490). 
But  the  suggestion  is  no  less  worth  thinking  of,  that,  as 
man's  spiritual  energy  evidently  tends  to  increase,  so  it 
may  he  with  all  spiritual  energy.  That  point  deserves  at- 
tention. 

I  am  snrprised  that  Dr.  Qruber  did  not  make  more  out 
of  the  diflSculty  I  myself  raised,  that  a  developing  Gtod  must 
have  once  been  notbing.  To  be  snre,  that  is  tbe  Hegelian 
position,  which  makes  "  pure  being "  equal  to  "  nothing." 
Hegel  gets  the  phenomenal  world  out  of  that  starting 
point,  but  1  confess,  esperientialists  cannot.  Whether  my 
answers  to  the  difficulty  amount  to  anything  or  not,  I 
should  be  glad  to  have  them  discussed,  particularly  my 
8U(^:e9tion  that  we  may  rest  satisfied  with  the  proposition 
"that  God  exists  and  is  progressing"  (p.  290). 

Let  me  not  fail,  in  closing,  to  recognize  the  ability  and 
thoroughness,  after  its  own  method,  of  Dr.  Qruber's  arti- 
cle.   It  has  reminded  me  of  Jonathan  EMwards. 

Prank  Hdgh  Fosraa 

Oberlin,  Ohio 


The  object  of  the  writer's  article  in  the  October  number 
of  the  BiBLioTHBCA  Sacra  wbs  not  30  much  to  answer  Dr. 
Foster,  or  any  other  individual  exponent  of  the  theory  of 
a  finite  and  developing  Deity,  as  it  was  to  discuss  that  the- 
ory itself  and  to  show  that  it  is  philosophically  untenable. 
Hence  the  article's  form  and  method  of  treatment.  To  this 
fact,  therefore,  must  he  attributed  the  several  misunder- 
standings and  misapplications  on  the  part  of  Dr.  Foster. 
However,  in  setting  forth  that  theory,  as  was  only  proper, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


128  BibUotheoa  Sacra  [Jed. 

in  tenoB  naed  b;  its  exponents,  Dr.  Foster's  illuminating 
article  demanded  special  attention.  And,  indeed,  wliile  my 
comment  (p.  490,  and  quoted  by  Dr.  Foster)  on  the  defense 
of  the  theory  by  its  exponents,  from  their  own  viewpoint 
was  meant  to  apply  to  the  accumulated  defense,  it  would 
surely  not  apply  less  to  Dr.  Foster's  .excellent  article  than 
to  any  other. 

It  is  tme  that  my  article  does  not  specifically  take  np, 
one  by  one,  the  expressed  and  implied  premises,  upon  whidi 
the  theory  of  a  finite  and  developing  Deity  is  based.  But 
this  is  because  such  treatment  would  have  taken  ns  too 
far  afield,  for  one  article,  upon  the  debatable  ground  that 
separates  the  two  great  schools  of  the  a  priori  and  the 
a  posteriori  philosophy.  And  yet  those  premises  are  in  the 
main  probably  none  the  less  covered  by  my  argument, 
which  was  meaut  to  be  positive  and  constructive  rather 
than  negative  and  controversial.  In  the  search  after  truth 
a  proper  combination  and  use  must  be  made  of  both  the 
a  priori  and  the  a  posteriori.  That  the  arguments  of  my 
article  are  valid  even  in  the  estimation  of  Dr.  Foster,  may 
be  gathered  from  the  fact  that  he  does  not  answer  any  one 
of  them ;  nor  does  he  even  set  aside  the  premises  as  invalid 
for  the  arguments.  He  even  admits  that,  upon  the  pre- 
mises, "  the  theory  in  question  must  be  rejected,  and  the 
static  view  of  God  maintained."  Then  why  not  show  that 
my  premises  are  false?  I  must  therefore  leave  to  the 
reader  the  consideration  of  the  validity  of  those  premises. 
He  will,  of  course,  readily  see  that  the  experiential  philos- 
ophy can  have  little  value  in  such  a  transcettdental  prob- 
lem, for  human  experience  could  not  measure  Deity  nor 
otherwise   resolve   the  questions  as  to   His  attributes   or 


As  to  the  implied  charge  that  I  have  no  right  to  say  that 
mwlem  science  "  assumes  a  unified  force  as  the  impelling 
cause "  of  the  universe,  I  would  say  that  I  did  not  say 
this  of  modem  science,  but  of  the  Bergsonian  philosophy 
of  creative  evolution  as  applied  to  the  theory  under  con- 
sideration. Moreover,  Dr.  Foster  also  erroneously  inter- 
prets my  statement  as  referring  to  the  law  of  conservation 
of  energj",  by  identifying  the  "unified  force"  as  cause 
with  that  great  generalization  of  modem  science  as  to  the 
aggregate  effect.  However,  even  upon  the  basis  of  Dr. 
Foster's  misinterpretation  of  my  words,  his  objection  is 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  CHtical  Notes  129 

gronndlesB.  If  the  law  of  conservation  were  really  estab- 
lished ait  absolute,  the  word  assume  would,  of  course,  not 
apply.  But  if  that  law  is  not  fiUly  established,  then  it  is  not 
improper  to  say  that  modern  science  "  assumes  "  as  a  great 
working  hypothesis  that  there  is  sucli  conservation,  and 
therefore  such  a  law.  But  Dr.  Poster  must  know  that  that 
supposedly  absolute  law  has  not  yet  been  fully  establishfttl. 
Indeeil,  some  of  the  world's  ablest  physicists  afe  among  the 
most  modest  in  their  claims  (or  that  law.  And,  for  that 
matter,  the  latest  investigations  into  the  nature  of  matter 
and  energy  no  longer  permit  us  to  accept  unchallenged 
that  great  law.  If  the  mass  and  inertia  of  the  constitutive 
electrons  of  so-called  matter  vary  with  velocity,  as  has 
apparently  been  established,  and  if  mass  is  essentially  elec- 
trical, or  nothing  but  energy  (a  theory  which  even  Berg- 
son  apparently  incorporates  into  bis  philosophy),  then 
both  matter  and  energy  (or  better,  matter  or  energy  as 
ultimately  identical)  are  variables.  Hence  it  should  fol- 
low, upon  Dr.  Foster's  own  dictum  ("  the  experiential 
philosophy  assumes  nothing"),  that  experiential  philos- 
ophy could  not  yet  own  the  law  (or  theory)  of  conserva- 
tion. At  any  rate,  it  must  be  a  strange  contradiction  on 
the  part  of  an  exponent  of  the  theory  of  a  finite  and  devel- 
oping Deity  also  to  accept  the  law  of  conservation.  For, 
if  that  law  were  absolute,  then  the  aggregate  of  energy  in 
the  universe  would  be  a  fixed  or  constant  quantity.  Hence, 
upon  the  basis  of  this  theory  of  Deity  as  the  "  Vital  Im- 
pulse "  conterminous  or  identical  with  the  universe  aa 
energy,  God  could  in  no  sense  ultimately  be  a  developing 
Being,  even  though  He  were  finite.  On  the  other  hand,  the 
doctrine  of  a  static  transcendent  God,  however  immanent 
He  may  be  in  nature,  is  not  in  the  least  affected  by  the 
statns  of  the  law  of  conservation. 

In  such  a  transcendental'  problem,  reasoning  upon  ac- 
cepted fundamentals  or  ultimates  as  premises  virtually 
makes  impossible  any  answer  that  is  based  upon  anything 
less  than  fundamentals  or  ultimates.  And,  of  course,  as 
we  have  shown  in  the  article  {pp.  513,  516),  it  is  impossi- 
ble to  rise  above,  and  even  intelligibly  to  discuss  or  define^ 
ultimates.  Indeed,  in  establishing  a  point,  or  drawing  a 
conclusion,  from  snch  an  argument,  especially  a  conclusion 
also  generally  accepted,  the  burden  of  proof  is  shifted  npon 
those  who  would  give  currency  to  a  theory  which  rests 
upon  premises  of  a  necessarily  limited  empiricism.  To 
Vol.  LZXVI.    No.  801.    9 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


130  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

deny  that  there  are  principles  and  laws  of  thought  that  are 
fundamental  in  human  reasoning,  is  to  do  so  in  the  face 
of  the  deliverances  of  universal  human  consciousness,  as 
well  as  all  ratiocinative  experience.  Indeed,  it  is  in  effect 
to  knock  the  very  pillars  from  under  the  temple  of  hnmau 
knowledge  and  to  make  the  same  collapse  into  a  heap  of 
ruins  of  a  universal  agnosticism.  Dr.  Foster's  suggestive 
quotation  from  James  affords  us  a  hint  in  that  direction, 
along  which  instead  one  mieht  profess  to  see  the  trail  of 
the  serpent.  But  as  we  are  not  answering  James,  further 
comment  is  unnecessary. 

From  a  simple  deliverance  of  consciousness  Descartes 
could  prove  personal  existence:  cogito,  ergo  sum.  Bat 
the  validity  of  even  this  proof  has  supposedly  been  set 
aside  by  shutting  up  consciousness  itself  within  the  term 
epiphenomenalism.  But  such  philosophy  is  really  self- 
destrnctive.  If  the  truth  of  the  above  demonstration  of 
personal  existence  rested  upon  a  mere  epiph^iomenon  or 
epipbenomena,  then  this  theory  of  epiphenomenalism  itself 
must  also  rest  upon  mere  epipbenomena.  Hence  the  proof 
above  has  at  least  as  much  validity  as  the  theory  that  would 
explain  it  away.  Or,  in  terms  of  a  mechanistic  philosophy, 
if  the  proof  of  personal  existence  is  merdy  the  result  of 
molecular,  or  perhaps  electrical,  brain  processes,  then  this 
theory  of  mind  or  consciousness  as  the  result  of  such  brain 
processes,  must  itself  be  the  result  of  these  hypothetical 
brain  processes.  Or,  by  the  result  of  some  mysterious 
brain  processes  the  individual  personality  has  come  to  the 
conclusion  that  mind  or  consciousness  is  but  an  epipbe- 
nomenon  of  such  brain  processes  and  that  at  least  as  a 
ps>'chical  entity  he  does  not  exist.  A  non-existent  person- 
ality reasoning  out  its  own  non-existence!  And  in  a  similar 
manner  even  as  a  physical  corporeity  the  individual  can 
prove  himself  to  be  a  non-reality!  In  some  such  reductio 
ad  nhnurdum  is  apt  to  end  nil  hnnnnn  ratiocination  that 
rejects  fundamental  deliverances  of  conscioosness  and  the 
resultant  principles  and  laws  of  thought. 

That  there  must  necessarily  be  some  infinite  aelf-existent 
and  eternal  entity,  no  exponent  of  the  theory  of  a  finite 
and  developing  Deity  can  disprove  or  even  seriously  deny. 
Its  existence  is  as  certain,  and  even  as  evident,  as  that  of 
my  own  finite  dependent  being.  To  answer  this  by  labeling 
it  a  priori,  will  not  disprove  the  apparently  incontrovert- 
ible and  indeed  manifestly  necessary  fact  or  in  any  other 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  131 

way  invalidate  the  argument;  nor  will  it  eatablisli  the  op- 
posite poBition  or  contention.  Tiiis  fact  of  the  existence 
of  Bome  necessarily  infinite,  and  of  course  eternal  and  self- 
existent  entity,  is  set  forth  at  some  length  in  the  article 
(pp.  491  ff.). 

An  infinite  entity  must  necessarily  also  be  unchanging. 
As  to  Dr.  Foster's  contention  that  I  did  not  prove  the  ex- 
istence of  an  ancbanging,  I  would  say  that  apparently 
enough  is  said  in  my  article  to  shift  the  burden  of  proof 
upon  those  who  hold  that  even  God  changes.  But  surely, 
not  only  does  the  word  change  imply  an  unchanging,  but 
the  ultimate  necessarily  infinite,  whether  consider^  as 
Ood  or  not,  must,  as  a  totality  at  least,  also  necesearUy 
be  unchanging,  a  fact  which  underlies  a  large  part  of  my 
argument.  That  an  infinite  cannot  develop  or  be  devel- 
oped should  need  no  further  proof  than  that  given  on 
pages  49Sff.  Surely  nothing  external  to  it  could  afford  a 
condition  for  such  development,  nor  could  anything  in- 
herent in  it  be  a  potentiality  to  make  it  become  more  in- 
finite! 

The  above  points  bring  us  to  a  determination  whether 
Ood  is  that  infinite  and  unchanging  entity.  Of  course,  as 
we  clearly  showed,  God  confined  within  or  somehow  iden- 
tical with  the  physical  cosmos  as  His  manifestation,  would 
necessarily  be  a  finite  Being;  and  as  a  finite  entity  He 
would  be  capable  of  development.  Indeed,  such  a  finite 
God  would  undoubtedly  have  to  be  a  developing  Being,  or  a 
Becoming.  But  He  could  surely  not  be  an  eternal  Becom- 
ing, unless,  as  we  have  shown,  that  Becoming  would  end 
in  an  absolutely  infinite.  But  this  would  in  the  nature  of 
the  case  be  impossible,  as  that  would  be  a  displacing  of 
the  necessarily  preexisting  infinite,  as  there  could  be  but 
one  infinite  of  the  same  kind.  Indeed,  such  a  finite  God 
as  a  Becoming  could  not  be  a  self-existent  and  eternal  Be- 
ing, as  we  have  shown  (p.  492).  And  as  He  must  therefore 
have  the  ground  of  His  Being  elsewhere,  where  else  could 
He  have  it  than  in  the  necessarily  infinite,  and  therefore 
eternal  entity  above  noted,  either  directly  or  indirectly 
through  some  other  dependent  finite  entity?  Such  a  finite 
and  temporal  God  would  thus  have  to  be  conceived  of  as 
dependent  upon  some  infinite  and  necessarily  self-existent 
and  eternal  entity  aa  his  supergod,  which  would  be  equiv- 
alent to  saying,  the  ultimate  real  God.  Hence,  the  error 
lies  in  identifying  Bergson's  finite  "  Vital  Impulse  "  with 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


132  Bibliotheca  Sacra 

God  instead  of  regarding  it  as  an  hypothetical  agent  or 
InBtrument  in  the  Deity's  modus  operandi,  according  to 
thJB  philosophy  (pp.  493,  499  ff.). 

And  that  Relf-exlstent  eternal  and  infinite  Deity  thus 
arrived  at,  must  necessarily  be  an  omnipotent  and  omnis- 
cient spiritual  PeraotiaUty.  Surely,  such  alone  could  be  an 
adequate  Ground  of  the  universe,  which  must  necessarily 
be  His  creation  (pp.  492,  504  ff.,  524-525;  and  developed  at 
some  length  in  Creation  Ex  Nihilo,  chaps,  iii.  and  viil.). 
Further  development  would  not  he  possible  here. 

The  insurmountable  difficulty  involved  in  a  retroactive 
application  of  thi?  theory  to  Ood  and  nature  in  the  past 
we  believe  has  been  amply  pointed  out  on  pages  487-488. 
Indeed,  as  such  application  would  end  us  where  there 
could  iiave  tieen  neither  God  nor  universe,  the  nntenability 
of  the  theory  so  applied  should  need  no  further  demonstra- 
tion. From  such  an  "Hegelism,"  as  the  student  of  Eegel 
will  admit,  even  Hegel  himself  could  not  deliver  us  any 
more  than  he  could  deliver  from  nothing  and  bring  into 
being  the  universe  with  its  God,  as  Dr.  Foster  also  ac- 
knowledges. 

It  must  not  he  foi^otteii  that  the  Bergsonian  theory  of 
creative  evolution  is  itself  only  a  good  working  hypothe- 
sis, and  that  Bergson  himself  has  not  yet  identified  his 
hypothetical  "  Vital  Impulse "  with  Deity.  Hence  the  ex- 
ponent of  the  theory  of  a  finite  and  developing  Deity  can- 
not safely  intrench  himself  behind  that  philosopher's  great 
work  as  an  impr^nable  bulwark  for  that  theory. 

L.  Franklin  Geubbib 

8t.  Paul,  Mitmeaota 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


.  NOTICES  OF  RECENT  PUBLICATIONS 

ParcHoLOOY    and    pRBACBiNg,     By   Chablus    S.    Qardnkb, 
ProfeB»or  of  Homiletics  and  Sociology  in  the  Sonthem 
Baptist  Tbeological  Seminary.    8vo.    Pp.  xii,  389.    New 
York:  The  Macmillan  Company.    1918.    |2.00,  net. 
This  is  more  than  an  ordinary  book  on  Homiletics.  The 
author  breaks  entirely  new  ground.     Instead  of  the  com- 
monplaces which  have  always  been  thrown  out  before  the 
tbeological  student  about  the  form  of  the  sermon,  the 
method  of  presentation,  and  many  other  obvious  standards, 
which  become  perfectly  evident  the  moment  the  average 
man  of  good  ability  begins  to  preach,   Dr.  Gardner  gets 
down  to  fundamentals,  and  reveals  those  secret  springs  of 
power  and  influence  which  lie  basic  in  the  will  and  the 
emotions  of  preachers  and  hearers. 

In  the  very  first  chapter  he  starts  out  to  erplore  the 
depths  of  conduct.  Conduct  he  finds  is  not  always  ra- 
tional. The  rational  has  imposed  upon  it  at  the  beginning 
certain  reflexes  produced  by  outward  stimuli  upon  tiie  ner- 
vous organization.  These  reflexes  gradually  shade  into  in- 
stincts, and  an  instinct  is  nothing  more  than  a  correlation 
and  adaptation  of  a  number  of  reflexes.  Then  there  are 
the  native  dispositions  derived  sometimes  by  heredity  and 
often  by  environment.  Then  comes  consciousness,  "  the 
inward  light  wliich  falls  upon  the  stream  of  experience," 
naturally  developing  habits,  which  is  represented  as  or- 
ganized consciousness. 

Mental  images  follow.  A  mental  image  is  a  "  conscious 
copy  of  an  experience."  The  value  and  the  danger  of  these 
mental  images  in '  the  preacher's  art  become  very  evident 
when  Dr.  Gardner  recalls  the  criticisms  sometimes  made 
of  preachers  because  of  false  and  exaggerated  statement. 
There  are  psychological  explanations  for  the  ministerial 
defects  in  this  regard,  and  it  will  be  very  helpful  to  the 
student  to  have  these  facts  befoi-e  him. 

The  next  step  in  the  mental  progress  is  the  building  up 
of  a  mental  system.  This  mental  system  results  from 
bringing  in  the  mental  images  of  past  experience  to  bear 
upon  the  situation  before  the  thinker  at  a  given  moment. 
A  mental  system  is  the  marshaling  of  all  our  mental  im- 
ages into  concepts;  it  is  a  unification  of  our  knowledge. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


184  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

Dr.  Qarrlner  diatinguisheB  between  the  man  who  thus 
coordinates  his  knowledge  for  theoretical  and  the  man 
who  eoftrdinates  it  for  practical  ends.  For  the  preacher 
must  recognize  these  types  in  applying  his  message.  Occu- 
pations and  interests  in  life  determine  the  character  of 
the  average  man.  It  is  therefore  necessary  that  the  preacher 
should  not  only  know  theology,  but  "  more  and  more  he 
needs  to  study  the  daily  life  of  the  people  as  well,"  for,  as 
Dr.  Gardner  very  truly  says,  it  is  mnch  easier  to  unite 
people  on  a  thing  to  do  than  on  a  system  to  be  believed, 

The  chapter  on  feelings  is  a  discriminating  discossion 
of  a  subject  which  has  been  treated  all  too  superficially. 
He  recognizes  the  part  which  the  feelings  play,  but  he 
shows  how  these  stormy  demonstrations  aroused  by  a 
strong  appeal  to  the  emotions  are  simply  reflexive  mus- 
cular reactions  and  do  not  grip  the  central  personality  of 
the  hearer.  The  religious  revival  is  not  condemned,  but  the 
superficial  appeal  to  the  emotions  is  most  dangerous  be- 
cause it  always  involves  a  mental  reaction. 

Just  as  mental  images  are  oi^nized  Into  a  system  of 
thought,  BO  the  feelings  are  organized  into  sentiments  and 
ideals.  Sentiments  are  made  up  of  the  primary  emotions, 
and  cluster  about  the  thought  of  home,  of  mother,  of  in- 
stitutions like  the  church  or  the  state  of  which  we  are  a 
part.  Now  when  any  one  of  these  sentiments  becomes 
dominant  and  monopolizes  the  personality  it  excludes  all 
other  sentiments,  and  rises  to  the  dignity  of  an  ideal  which 
sways  the  whole  life  desire  and  activity. 

The  discussion  on  the  excitation  of  the  feelings  and  emo- 
tions is  not  only  valuable  from  the  standpoint  of  theoret- 
ical knowledge,  but  for  the  preacher  is  of  a  great  practical 
worth.  Finely  does  Dr.  Gardner  show  that  the  impression 
upon  an  audience  is  rather  in  inverse  ratio  to  the  amount 
of  action  on  the  part  of  the  speaker,  since  great  heat  and 
intensity  on  the  part  of  the  speaker  has  a  tendency  to  les- 
sen the  internal  tension  of  the  hearer.  The  personality  of 
the  hearer  is  most  receptive  when  it  holds  itself  consciously 
to  the  theme  presented. 

The  attitude  of  mind  toward  belief  and  doubt  in  this 
discussion  is  so  very  suggestive  and  helpful  that  the  author 
himself  must  be  permitted  to  speak  to  the  reader.  The 
various  descriptions  of  the  open,  the  wavering,  the  vacant, 
and  the  closed  mind  should  be  of  great  help  to  the  preacher 
in  adapting  his  message  to  various  classes  of  hearers.   In 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1911)]  Noticeg  of  Recent  Publxcations  135 

a  Bimilar  way,  the  arreeting  of  the  attention  of  the  hearer, 
80  that  it  shall  be  spontaneous  and  not  forced,  and  lead  to 
action  which  is  voluntary  and  positive,  are  matters  of  im- 
perative neceBBity  if  the  speaker  is  to  accomplish  bis 
purpose  with  his  hearer. 

In  these  days  when  we  hear  a  great  deal  about  sugges- 
tion, Dr.  Gardner  soondfi  a  strong  note  against  any  form 
of  suggestion  that  makes  for  an  uncritical  acceptance  of 
the  ideas  of  the  preacher.  The  acceptance  of  any  truth  ia 
useless  unless  it  Is  voluntary  and  leads  to  a  rational  con- 
trol of  conduct.  Too  many,  Dr.  Gardner  asserts,  have  been 
compromised  all  through  life  by  the  oncritical  acceptance 
of  Christian  truth.  It  accounts  for  a  brave  show  of  nu- 
merical strength  by  the  church  with  a  strange  lack  of  power 
in  organized  Christianity. 

'With  these  foundations  deeply  laid  for  the  preacher's 
guidance,  Dr.  Gardner  proceeds  to  study  the  character  of 
assemblies,  of  mental  epidemics,  of  occupational  types  and 
the  mo<lem  mind.  Fortunate  are  the  students  who  have 
listened  to  these  fine  expositions,  tor  they  lie  so  funda- 
mentally, and  yet  so  clearly,  at  the  root  of  all  practical 
and  effective  preaching,  that  an  understanding  of  them  is 
vitally  necessary  to  the  preacher's  success. 

This  book  marks  an  epoch  in  homiletic  literature.  It  is 
the  first  book  that  treats  scientifically  the  secrets  of  strong 
and  effective  preaching.  It  does  for  the  preacher  what  the 
work  of  psychologists  like  Professor  James  of  Harvard  has 
done  for  the  teacher.  It  opens  up  the  secrets  of  personality, 
and  reveals  the  hidden  springs  of  conduct,  and  the  true 
and  the  false  methods  by  which  the  conduct  of  men  and  of 
society  have  been  aud  may  yet  be  shaped.  If  not  to  actu- 
ally replace,  it  surely  shonld  supplement  in  the  preacher's 
library,  all  the  homiletic  literature  of  the  last  fifty  yeara. 
N.  Van  dbr  Pyl 

Sbliqion  :  Its  Prophets  and  False  Prophets.  By  Jambs 
Bishop  Tbohas,  Professor  of  Systematic  Theology  in 
the  University  of  the  Bouth,  Sewanee,  Tenn,  8vo.  Pp. 
xxvii,  256.  New  York:  The  Macmillan  Company.  1918. 
$1.50,  net. 

An  interesting  experience  gave  birth  to  this  book.  Pro- 
fessor Thomas  had  gone  to  Germany  to  study  the  social 
implications  of  the  gospel  of  Jesus  under  the  leadership  of 
men  who  had  taken  advanced  ground  in  the  application  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


136  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

the  principles  of  Jesus  to  the  life  and  problems  of  to-day. 
But  while  in  Germany,  he  found  a  gradual  tendency  to 
move  away  from  that  position,  and  to  accept  the  imperial- 
istic ideals  which  since  have  plunged  the  world  into  the 
Great  War.  This  apostasy  on  the  part'  of  German  theo- 
logians served  to  strengthen  his  own  views  of  the  social 
meaning  of  the  gospel,  and  the  result  is  this  book. 

The  object  of  the  book  is  to  study  the  two  types  of  relig- 
ion which  he  characterizes  as  the  prophetic  and  the  ex- 
ploiting, the  question  of  supreme  importance  being  to  place 
Jesus  in  relation  to  the  prophetic  type. 

Professor  Thomas  begins  his  study  with  the  history  of 
the  rise  of  Jewish  ecclesiasticism  and  prophetism  with  their 
theolopy  and  ethic,  leading  to  the  monopoly  of  religion 
finally  by  the  priest  by  the  falsiflcation  of  the  religions 
baelcground  of  history.  It  was  this  monopoly  of  religion 
by  the  priestly  class  which  Jesus  encountered  during  his 
earthly  career,  and  against  which  he  hurled  the  burden  of 
his  great  message  of  the  kingdom.  Then  followed  again 
the  pTOWth  of  a  priestly  class,  hardening  into  the  ecclesi- 
asticism of  the  Roman  Church.  From  time  to  time  insur- 
gent prophets  like  8t,  Francis,  Arnold  of  Brescia,  Dante, 
Wycliffe,  Savonarola,  raised  their  voices  against  this  on- 
socializing  of  religion,  of  making  it  a  thing  of  abstraction 
rather  than  a  vital  factor  in  human  life  and  society.  The 
"  Reformation  so-called "  of  Luther  and  Calvin  and  the 
period  of  Henry  VIII,  were  simply  transfers  of  the  system 
from  one  exploiting  class  to  another,  which,  he  maintains, 
is  now  being  adjusted  by  those  who  have  caught  the  social 
implications  of  the  gospel  in  recent  days. 

This  age  is  beginning  more  an<\  more  to  understand  the 
significance  of  this  message  which  Professor  Thomas  puts 
before  us  in  this  book.  The  religion  of  individualism,  which 
shut  out  the  application  of  the  principles  of  the  gospel  to 
the  whole  of  life,  —  to  national  institutions  and  society  as 
a  whole,  as  well  as  to  the  individual,  —  has  gone  to  seed 
in  the  present  state  of  Germany,  and  a  gracious  Providence 
is  bringing  this  emasculated  Christianity  to  the  judgment 
at  this  very  time.  There  is  always  the  danger,  however,  of 
carrying  the  point  too  far  the  other  way,  and  making  the 
individual  only  an  insignificant  atom  in  the  great  lamp 
of  fiocietj'.  This  Professor  Thomas  happily  avoids,  and  it 
is  this  fact  that  gives  the  book  its  worth.  In  these  days 
when  social  movements  are  in  danger  of  being  torn  from 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Pullicationa  137 

all  syBteme  of  religion,  a  book  like  this  is  needed  to  show 
how  vitallj  the  two  are  related.  This  is  a  safe  book  to 
meet  the  radicalism  which  divorces  social  progress  from 
the  goepel  of  JeeuB  Christ,  and  makes  it  merely  a  quest  for 
a  full  stomach  and  more  bolidaTs.  v.  v.  d.  p. 

Sbligious  Education  in  the  Church.     By  Hknbt  Pkbd- 
EBicK  Copi,  General  Secretary  of  the  Religious  Educa- 
tion   Association.     12mo.     Pp.    viii,    274.     New    York : 
Charles  Scribner'e  Sons.    1918.    |1.25,  net. 
It  is  an  ideal  church  that  Dr.  Cope  has  in  mind  when  he 
lays  out  a  program  for  it.    One  would  like  to  see  a  church 
at  work  which  is  doing  all  the  things  that  Dr.  Cope  lays 
down  for  his  ideal  church. 

There  is  this  to  be  said  for  Dr.  Cope's  program,  that  it 
does  not  limit  itself  to  the  children  of  the  chnrch,  or  to 
the  Sunday  school.  His  educational  scheme  for  the  church 
coniprehendft  the  services  of  public  womhip,  the  preaching, 
the  hortatory  appeals  of  evangelism,  the  social  life  of  the 
church,  society  in  all  its  phases,  and  even  the  physical  up- 
bnilding  of  the  individual.  Tliat  is  an  ambitions  program, 
and  it  can  liardly  be  expected  to  be  realized  in  the  indi- 
vidual church. 

Yet  this  is  the  church's  fundamental  work.  Religion  is 
intended  for  the  whole  man  in  all  his  varied  relationships. 
And  it  is  for  the  church  to  foster  and  reinforce  everything 
which  ministers  to  the  whole  man.  Life  to-day  has  become 
exceedingly  complex,  and  this  very  complexity  of  life  calls 
for  new  ways  of  approach  to  life  from  the  church.  The 
time  has  gone  by  when  a  preaching  service,  a  Sunday- 
school  session,  and  a  pastoral  visit  now  and  then  rep- 
resent the  whole  work  of  the  church.  There  are  social 
conditions  of  which  the  former  generation  knew  nothing. 
Changes  in  community  life,  home  life,  and  world  aims  call 
for  new  adaptations.  And  the  church  must  adjust  itself 
if  it  is  to  continue  to  be  a  shaping  force  in  the  whole  life 
of  the  world.  To  meet  this  need  on  the  part  of  the  church, 
such  a  book  as  this  will  prove  a  helpful  guide,     n.  v,  d.  p. 

The  Winnino  of  Rilioious  Libbrtt,     By  Josiph  Henbt 
Cbookke,  D.D.,  author  of  "  Shall  I  Drink?  "  "  The  Church 
of  To-dav,"  "  The  Church   of  To-morrow."     12mo.     Pp. 
xiv,  269.'   Boston:  The  Pilgrim  Press.     1918.     $1.50. 
Dr.  Crooker  has  rendered  very  important  service  to  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1^8  BibUotheea  Sacra  [Jan. 

reading  public  in  this  condensed,  jet  compreheuaive  and 
clear,  portraiture  of  the  struggles  through  which  religious 
liberty  has  been  obtained  in  a  portion  of  the  world.  It  is 
a  toilsome  road  over  which  reformers  have  traveled,  but 
they  have  led  us  to  a  glorious  inheritance  of  freedom  and 
truth.  It  is  humiliating  for  us  to  recall  that  religious  per- 
secution was  not  practiced  by  the  Inquisition  alone,  but 
that  Protestants  both  in  Europe  and  America  have  used 
this  instrument  of  persuasion  in  its  most  horrible  form. 
In  England  during  the  early  part  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury eminent  scholars  were  burned  at  the  stake  for  enter- 
taining erroneous  opinions  about  the  Trinity.  In  1651 
three  Baptist  ministers  were  lodged  in  the  Boston  (Mass.) 
jail  for  holding  a  meeting  at  a  private  house,  and  heavily 
fined ;  and  because  one  of  them  did  not  pay  his  fine  he  was 
whipped  thirty  stripes,  and  two  of  his  parishioners  were 
sentenced  ten  lashes  or  forty  shillings  for  shaking  hands 
with  him  while  he  was  going  to  the  whipping  post.  Neither 
was  such  persecution  confined  to  Massachusetts,  but  in 
New  YorlE  and  Virginia  tbe  same  persecuting  spirit  pre- 
vailed in  the  Dutch  Reformed  and  Episcopal  churches. 

The  prevalence  of  toleration,  which  ended  in  the  re- 
ligions liberty  which  is  now  enjoyed  in  all  Anglo-Saxon 
countries  as  well  as  in  some  others,  is,  according  to  Dr. 
Crooker,  the  outcome  of  influences  set  in  motion  by  Mar- 
silius  of  I'adua,  who  in  1324  wrote  "  Defensor  Pacis,"  a 
most  powerful  treatise  from  which  Wiclif  borrowed  exten- 
sively. This  was  translated  into  German  in  1522  and  into 
English  in  1535,  and  issued  in  more  than  a  score  of  edi- 
tions and  translations;  thus  preparing  the  way  for  the 
Reformation  in  Germany  and  the  establishment  of  liberty 
in  English-speaking  countries. 

But  the  growth  of  religious  liberty  was  slow  and  the 
great  leaders  of  Protestantism  to  a  large  extent  failed  both 
in  their  theory  and  practice.  Luther  advocated  a  State 
Church  which  put  Catholics  and  Anabaptists  under  the 
ban.  "  Calvinism  saved  Europe,"  but  Calvin  himself  justi- 
fied the  execution  of  Servetus.  Nevertheless,  Dr.  Crooker 
characterizes  his  teachings  as  "  far  broader  and  less  hor- 
rible than  those  of  later  Calvinism."  and  adds  that  "  in 
that  transition  time  a  strong  man  wan  needed,  and  he 
gathered  and  disciplined  the  men  who  saved  Protestantism 
and  made  Europe  free"  (p.  67).  The  third  chapter  of  the 
volume  treats  of  the  independent  congregation  as  it  was 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  139 

developed  is  England,  and  the  fourth  chapter  gives  a  clear, 
vivid,  and  trustworthy  account  of  the  contribution  made 
to  religious  freedom  in  the  American  colonies,  especially 
in  New  England.  To  the  Pilgrim  Colony  at  Plymouth 
belongs  the  credit  of  first  incorporating  the  principles  of 
religious  liberty  in  a  civic  community  and  religious  con- 
gregation in  America.  "  No  other  company  in  that  age, 
though  many  times  its  size,  held  in  trust  such  valuable 
political  and  spiritual  treasures.  .  .  .  No  other  made  so 
profound  and  creative  an  impression  upon  the  course  of 
human  events  on  this  continent.  No  other  continued  to 
exist  until  its  Ideal  became  the  working  method  of  a  great 
Nation"  (p.  244).  This  volume  should  be  read  by  all  in 
anticipation  of  the  coming  of  the  tercentenary  celebration 
of  the  landing  of  the  Pilgrims. 

Thb  Chbistian  Appboach  to  Islam.  By  Jamks  L.  Barton, 
Foreign  Secretary  of  American  Boarij  of  Commisflioners 
for  Foreign  Missions ;  author  of  "  Daybreak  in  Turkey," 
etc.  8vo.  Pp.  XV,  316.  Boston:  The  Pilgrim  Press. 
1918.     12.00. 

The  clearest  and  most  comprehensive  statement  which 
has  been  made  of  the  characteristics  of  Mohammedanism, 
and  of  its  relations  to  the  political,  social,  and  religious 
movements  of  the  modem  world.  Both  the  strength  and 
the  weakness  of  Mohammedanism  are  presented  in  full  de- 
tail. First,  the  external  history  is  given  in  sufficient  detail 
for  the  average  reader's  understanding  of  the  subject.  With 
equal  success  the  character  of  the  religion  is  presented; 
thus  leading  to  the  most  important  part  of  the  discussion, 
which  the  author  is  specially  qualified  to  conduct,  namely, 
its  relation  to  Christianity,  and  the  best  methods  of  car- 
rying on  missionary  work  among  Moslem  peoples.  The 
timeliness  of  the  volume  is  manifest  at  a  glance. 

Bbrmons  on  the  International  Bundat-School  Lessons 

FOR  1919.    Bv   the   Monday  Club,    Forty-fourth    Series. 

12mo.    Pp.  i'x,  366.     Boston:  The  Pilgrim  Press.    1918. 

»1.25. 

For  forty-four  years  the  Monday  Club  have  furnished 
sermons  upon  the  Sunday-school  lessons,  which  have  met 
a  permanent  want,  as  is  shown  by  the  continued  demand 
for  them.  Of  the  thirty  Congregational  clergyman  who 
furnish  the  sermons  in  this  volume,  only  four  (one  of  whom 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


140  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jan. 

is  Prof.  Wright),  were  original  meiDt>er8  of  the  Club.  Bat 
though  tJie  particlea  ma;  change,  the  stream  goes  on  for- 
ever, and  we  repeat  what  we  have  said  before,  that  the  pul- 
pit furnishes  the  best  position  for  the  interpretation  of  the 
Bible.  This  series  is  fully  up  to  the  standard  set  in  the 
past. 

Thii  OonwARD  Side  op  Lipb.    By  Gaius  Glbnn  Atkins. 

12mo.    Pp.  viii,  192.     Boston:  The  Pilgrim  Press.    1918. 

¥1.50,  net. 

Dr.  Atkins  is  a  type  of  preacher  who,  amid  the  rush  of 
our  time,  when  men  think  little  about  the  deep  things  of 
the  spirit,  is  giving  the  message  that  man  eternally  needs. 
Fortunate  for  the  city,  where  the  rush  of  commercialism 
is  wild  for  six  days  in  the  week,  to  have  in  its  heart  a 
chureh  where  such  searching  sermons  are  being  preached. 

Here  are  fourteen  sermons,  every  one  of  which  gets  be- 
neath the  SHrface  of  thingn,  and  lays  bare  those  godlike 
qualities  and  aims  which  man  still  needs  to  lift  him  to 
the  Eternal.  Dr.  Atkins  resembles  Martineau  in  the  style 
of  his  preaching;  and  reading  these  sermons,  one  finds 
that  in  method  of  treatment  and  type  of  tJiinking  he 
owes  something  to  Martineau.  In  fact,  a  few  of  his  sub- 
jects are  directly  taken  from  the  sermons  of  the  great  Eng- 
lish thinker.  Yet  Dr.  Atkins  thinks  for  himself,  and  he 
conveys  his  own  message  and  not  another's. 

The  Brkath  in  the  WiKna  and  Other  Sermons.   By  Fkod- 
BBicK  F.  Shannon,  Pastor  of  the  Reformed  Church-on- 
the-Heights,    Brooklvu.     12mo.     Pp.    173.     New    York: 
Fleming  H.  Revell  Company.     1918.    |1.00,  net. 
Dr.  Shannon  has  been  sending  forth  sermons  with  some 
profusion.     Here  is  an  altogether  different  type  of  sermon 
fi-om   that   exemplified    in    the   preaching   of   Dr.   Atkins. 
They  are  referred  to  as  brilliant;  they  sparkle.    They  are 
full  of  illustrative  material.    They  are  readable,  and  they 
must  have  been  easy  to  listen  to.    Such  varied  preaching 
as  that  of  Dr.  Atkins  and  Dr.  Shannon   illustrates  the 
varied  needs  of  man's  religious  nature,  and  how  varied  also 
preachers  should  be  in  their  methods  of  appeal.    The  ser- 
mons are  all  direct,  pointed,  and  appealing. 

With  God  in  the  Wae.    16mo.    Pp.  ix.  116.    New  York: 
The  Macmillan  Company.    1918.    60  cents. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  KoticeB  of  Recent  Publications  141 

The  Pulpit  in  War  Timk.  By  Maetin  D.  Hardin,  D.D., 
LL.D.;  Charlbs  F.  WishabTj  D.D.;  Andkbw  C.  Zbnos, 
D.D.;  John  M.  Van  dbr  Msulen,  D.D.;  Jambs  G.  K. 
McClurb,  D,D.,  LL,D.;  Williau  Chalmbbs  Covbrt,  D.D., 
LL.D.;  David  Hugh  Jonbs,  D.D.;  Edgar  P.  Hill,  D.D., 
LL.D.;  Clbland  B.  McAfbb,  Ph.D.,  D.D.;  John  Timo- 
thy Stone,  D.D.,  LL.r>.  With  ao  Introduction  by  Ed- 
gar P.  Hill,  D.D.,  LL.D.  16mo.  Pp.  173.  Philadelphia : 
The  Westininster  Press.    1918.    75  cents,  net. 

The  War  and  the  Bible.  By  H.  O.  Enblow,  D.D.,  Temple 
Ematin-el,  New  York.  16nio.  Pp.  v,  115.  The  Macmil- 
lan  Compaay.    1918.    60  cents. 

The  Biblb  View  op  the  World:  An  Exposition  of  the 
Abiding  Principles  of  Christian  Truth,  as  Applied  to 
the  Conditions  of  Modem  Life  and  the  Circumstances 
of  the  Present  Hour.  By  the  Rev.  Martin  Anstby,  B.D., 
M.A.,  author  of  "  The  Romance  of  Bible  Chronology." 
16ino.    Pp.  ix,  148.    London,  Morgan  and  Scott, 

America — Herb  and  Ovbb  Thbrb.  By  Lutheb  B,  Wilson, 
Bishop  of  the  Methodist  Episcopal  Church.  16mo.  Pp. 
107.  New  York:  The  Abingdon  Press.  1918.  75  cents, 
net. 

Christian  Internationalism.  By  William  Pibrson  Mer- 
rill. 12mo.  Pp.  V,  193.  New  York:  The  Macmillan 
Company.    1919.    |1.50. 

God's  Responsibility  for  thb  War.  By  Edward  8.  Drown, 
D.D.,  I'rofessor  in  the  Episcopal  Theological  School  in 
Cambridge,  and  author  of  "  The  Apostles'  Creed  To-day," 
IRmo.  Pp.  V,  56.  New  York:  The  Macmillan  Company. 
1919.    60  cents. 

Of  the  many  volumes  called  into  existence  by  the  war 
from  which  the  world  has  just  emerged,  special  notice  is 
called  to  the  following : — 

J.  "With  God  in  the  War."  This  is  a  miscellaneous 
collection  of  brief  utterances,  both  in  poetry  and  in  prose, 
which  outline  the  purpose,  the  way,  and  the  goal.  Though 
designed  for  use  of  men  in  the  National  service,  it  is  of 
eqnal  value  to  readers  of  every  description. 

2.  "  The  Pulpit  in  War  Time,"  which  consists  of  ten 
sermons  by  prominent  Chicago  Presbyterian  clergymen. 
The  sermons  were  all  preached  in  the  ordinary  course  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


142  J  Bibliotkeca  Sacra  [Jan. 

Sabbath  services  and  were  not  prepared  with  view  to  pub- 
lication. They  therefore  give  a  fairly  accurate  idea  of  the 
way  the  putpits  of  America  have  arisen  to  meet  the  wants 
of  the  present  occasion. 

3.  "  The  War  and  the  Bible,"  which,  in  nine  chapters, 
treats  of  the  varioua  problems  that  arise  connected  with  the 
war  and  Christianity,  the  last  chapter  being  an  inspiring 
one  on  "  The  Peace  Ideals  of  the  Bible." 

4.  "The  Bible  View  of  the  World."  This  voliime, 
though  issued  in  the  early  part  of  tbe  war,  leads  naturally, 
in  one  of  the  closing  chapters,  to  a  helpfnl  discussion  of 
Christianity  and  war.  The  book  contains  an  outline  state- 
ment of  the  conservative  views  in  exposition  of  the  abid- 
ing principles  of  Christian  truth,  and  as  snch  is  highly  to 
be  commended. 

5.  "America — Here  and  Over  There"  contains  four  ad- 
dresses by  the  eminent  author  npon  returning  from  a  pro- 
longed visit  to  the  front  in  Italy  and  France. 

6.  An  impassioned  plea  for  "  internationalism  "  as  op- 
posed to  "  un-nationatism,"  which  he  describes  as  a  sort  of 
"free  love-isni,"  We  can  be  patriotic  and  still  wort  for  a 
union  of  nations  with  force  enough  behind  it  to  compel  its 
dictates.  The  discussion  is  comprehensive  and  discrimi- 
natory, and  deserves  to  be  read  by  everyone  in  this  crisis 
in  national  affairs. 

7.  A  complete  and  satisfactory  answer  to  those  who 
ai^e  God's  flniteness  from  the  evils  permitted  in  the  pres- 
ent war.  It  is  not  God's  power  so  much  as  his  wisdom 
that  is  at  stake  in  the  evils  permitted  in  the  world.  The 
book  is  preeminently  one  for  the  times.  Seldom  have  we 
found  BO  much  wisdom  bo  well  expressed  in  small  compass. 

Thk   Outdooe   Story   Book:   for  Children   from   Four   to 
Eleven.     By  Carolyn  Sheewin  Bailey.     12mo.     Pp.  x, 
223.    Boston :  The  Pilgrim  Press.    1918.    flM,  net. 
A  series  of  fifty  stories,  parables  of  the  four  seasons, 
personifying  the  flowers,  tbe  birds,  the  trees,  and  the  liv- 
ing world,  all  telling  their  purposes,  their  hopes  and  fears, 
to  the  child  for  whom  all  nature  has  a  voice. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


The  Bible  Champion 

Official  Organ  of  the  Bible  "League  of  North  America 

FORMERLY   THE    AMERICAN   BIBLS    LEAGUE 

Ad  Otgtnixatioo  formed  to  promote  a  true  knowledge  of  the  Bible 
sad  coniequeDt  faith  in  iti  Divine  Authority 

In  its  New  Form  —  greatly  improved  and  enlarged  —  there  is  do 
magazine  published  to-day  that  gives  greater  value  for  the  inveatment 
made.  We  wieh  to  prove  this  stroug  claim  made  for  the  Bible  Cham- 
pion to  every  reader  of  the  Bibliotheea  Sacra. 

The  price  of  the  Bible  Champion  is  ?1.50  the  year;  Canada,  fl.65; 
Foreign,  J1.75 ;  Single  copy,  15c.  It  is  the  policy  of  the  Publishers  not 
to  send  free  sample  copiew.  BUT  as  an  inducement  to  the  readers  of 
Bibliotheea  Sacra  to  examine  a  recent  number  of  Bible  Champion  we 
will  promptly  mail  yon  a  January  number  if  you  will  inclose  Five  One- 
cent  stamps  with  your  request.  This  offer  will  not  be  repeated !  Send 
for  yours  to-day! 

OK,  if  yon  will  inclose  the  price  of  a  year's  subscription  we  will 
send  you  a  volume,  cloth,  of  Dr.  Eaenwein's  "  Feathers  for  Shafts,"  free, 
prepaid,  as  a  Premium. 

OR,  send  ns  the  price  of  a  year's  subscription,  and  add  50c  to  it, 
and  get  any  one  of  the  cloth-bound  books  below,  prepaid : — 

"  Concessions  of  Liberalists  to  Orthodoxy  "  (344  pp.,  f  1.50) ,  by 
Dr.  Dorchester;  or,  "Christianity  and  Positivism"  (370  pp.,  |1.75),  by 
President  McCosh;  or,  "Footprints  of  Sorrow"  (373  pp.,  ?1,50),  by 
Dr.  Held;  or,  "  Voices  of  the  Soul  Answered  In  God  "  {374  pp.,  fl.50), 
by  Dp.  Reid;  or,  "Christ  and  Hie  Religion"  (311  pp.,  tl.50),  by  Dr. 
Reid.  For  f2.00  we  will  send  yon  any  one  of  above  volumes  and  the 
Bible  Champion  a  year,  prepaid.     (Canada,  $2.15;  Foreign,  |2.25.) 

JAY  BENSON  HAMILTON,  D.D..  Editor.  191  South  2  Street, 
Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

ASSOCIATE    EDITORS 

David  James  Burrell,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  William  H.  Rates,  D.D.,  Herbert  W. 

Magoun,  Ph.D.,  Luther  T.  Townseiid,  D.D.,  LL.D., 

Q.  Frederick  Wright,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Address  all  Orders,  and  mail  on  matters  of  Business,  to 
FRANK  J.  BOYER 
,  lUanaging  Editor  and  Publisher,  Reading,  Pa. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Creation  Ex  Nihilo 

The  Physical  Universe 
a  Finite  and  Temporal  Entity 


L.  Frauklin  Gruber 

with  •  foreword  by 
G.  Frederick  Wright,  D.D.,  F.G.S.  A. 

316  pages.  12mo,  doth 
$1.50  net 


"1  have  becD  iDfluenced  by  thk  book 

u  I  have  aot  been  inSaeDGed  .by  any 

offieT  book  within  Iweotv-five  yean." 

Frank,  w.  Gunsaulus 

Discount  of  20?fc 

on  ihit  (or  any  of  OUR  pubticaiioai) 
to  all  BIbliotheca  Sacra  tubacriben  re- 
micting  direct  to  ui  for  1919  before 
April, U919.  Carriage  prepaid  on  the 
boob. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Vol.  LXXVI 


BIBLIOTHECA  k 

Eighty-Ninth  Year 


EDITOR 

G.  FREDERICK  WRIGHT 


JAliaS  LINDSAY,  CHAKLES  F.  THWING,  A.  A.  BESLE,  WltXIAM  E.  BAKTON 

HBNRY  A.  STIUSON,  HERBERT  W.   MAGOUH,  AZAXIAH  S.  BOOT 

HBLVIN  G.  KYLE,  W.  H.  GRIFFITH  THOUAS 

GEOSGE  B.  HALL 


Thk  Jisn>  OF  A  Nbw  CoitcKPnoiT  or  God A^dreio  OilUea  143 

Sm  in  TKK  UOBT  OF  To-day Olive  3f.  WincHegter  -163 

Thx  Gebuah  AiTiTtnic  to  the  Biblb    .     .     .     .    W.  H.  Oriffith  Thomas  165 

Pkust — PsmaTHOOO William  B.  Bate.a  ITS 

OonTBiBUTioiis  TO  A   Nbw  TsrawT   OF  THB   Composition  or  thb  Pewta- 

zBDOa   (III.) Harold  M.  Wiener  193 

Ahovah Joteph  D.   Wil»oa  221 

Cbitioai.  Notes — 

Tlie  Hun  and  the   Imprecatory   pBalme     .      .     .     .     W.   A.  Jarrel  228 

Tfae  text  ot  Numbers  xzl.  14 1 H.  U.  Wiener  232 

NaTille  on  the  Composition  and  Sources  of  Oeneals 

John  BoaJ  WiaMman  231 

"The  Student's  Theodore" Y.  Oola  243 

Notices  of  Recekt  Pitbuoations 2&0 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA  COMPANY 

OBERUN,  OHIO,  U.  S.  A. 

EtntopxAiT  AsBirra,  CaAaLss  Hiohak  ft  SqiR 
27a  FaiTlngdon  Street,  London,  H.  C 

WfUILI   NUMBER,  7B  CENTS  YEARLY   BUBSCRimON,  tLOO 

Katfftd  at  th«  Post  Office  In  Oberlln,  Ohio,  as  S«cond<«laaa  Ilattar 

D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^l'C 


Unusual  Blessing 

Attended  the  Confereace  on  "  World  Evangelism  and  Vital  Christianity 
After  the  War"  held  at  The  Moody  Bible  Institute  of  Chicago,  Feb- 
ruary 3-7.  From  Monday  night,  when  Dr.  James  M.  Gray  gave  the 
address  of  welcome,  sounding  the  keynote  of  the  Conference,  which  was 
to  be  the  importance  of  "  proclaiming  the  Gospel  that  we  have  always 
proclaimed,  and  holding  up  the  standard  of  the  Cross,"  until  the  last 
address  by  Dr.  Howard  Agnew  Johnston  on  "  The  Atmosphere  of  Spirit- 
ual Power,"  every  speaker  rallied  whole-heartedly  to  a  constructive 
program  of  evangelism  and  united  testimony  to  the  fundamentals  of 
the  faith. 

Men  from  many  denominations^  leaders  in  their  circles,  spoke  of 
nearly  every  phase  of  work  which  now  lies  before  us  in  preaching 
Christ  and  Him  Crucifietl  to  a  lost  and  perishing  world.  Amoug  the 
speakers  were  the  following :  Bev.  Joseph  Kyle,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  President 
Xenia  Theological  Seminary;  Rev.  J.  C.  Massee,  D.D.,  First  Baptist 
Church,  Dayton,  Ohio;  Evangelist  Henry  Ostrom,  Methodist;  Bev.  Sam- 
uel M.  Zwemer,  D.D.,  Missionary,  Cairo,  Egj-pt;  Rev.  E.  M.  Potent,  D.D., 
ex-President  Furman  Baptist  College;  Kev,  D.  S.  Kennedy,  D.D.,  Ed- 
itor The  Presbyterian,  Philadelphia;  Rev.  John  McNicol,  B.D.,  Toronto 
Bible  College;  Rev.  E.  A.  Wollam,  Cleveland  Bible  Institute;  Rev.  W. 
Ellis,  Vancouver  Bible  Institute;  Rev.  Wm.  B.  Riley,  Northwestern 
Bible  School,  Minneapolis;  Rev.  Wm.  L.  Pettingill,  Dean  Philadelphia 
School  of  the  Bible ;  Rev.  John  A.  Davis,  Evangelist ;  Bishop  Joseph  F. 
Berry,  Methodist,  Philadelphia;  also  Jewish  Mission  and  Rescue  Mis- 
sion representatives. 

By  special  arrangement  THE  CHRISTIAN  WORKERS  MAGA- 
ZINE will  publish  a  fuU  report  of  the  important  addresses  in  the  March 
and  April  numbers.  No  extra  charge  will  be  made  for  this,  as  it  will  be 
sold  at  the  regular  price  of  a  single  copy  of  the  magazine  —  only  15 
cents,  or  the  two  for  25  cents  —  but  order  at  once  if  you  desire  a  copy. 

In  the  April  number  to  follow  will  be  published  a  special  article 
by  Pastor  D.  M.  I'anton,  of  Norwich,  England,  on  "  The  Present  Rise 
and  Ultimate  End  of  Democracy." 

THE  CHRISTIAN  WORKERS  MAGAZINE  is  published  monthly 
at  f  1.50  a  year.    Address 

THE  CHRISTIAN  WORKERS  MAGAZINE 

144  Institute  Place,  CHICAGO,  ILL. 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA 


THE  NEED  OF  A  NEW  CONCEPTION  OF  GOD 

ANDBBW   GILLIES 
ROCHESTER^    NEW    YORK 

It  is  now  quite  generally  agreed  that  Germany's  madness 
can  be  traced  straight  back  to  Germany's  apostasy.  Put- 
ting the  facta  in  terms  of  national  life,  it  is  said  that  Ger- 
man Kultnr,  with  its  brood  of  insane  and  piratical  acts,  is 
the  legitimate  offspring  of  German  Rationalism.  Or,  per- 
sonalizing the  whole  matter,  it  is  stated  that  es-Emperor 
William's  philosophy  and  conduct  are  alike  fiendish  be- 
cause bis  god,  with  whom  he  seemed  for  so  long  to  be  on 
astonishingly  familiar  terms,  is  not  the  Christian  Ck»d  at 
all,  but  some  barbaric  deity.  Here  is  another  case  of  a 
man's  becoming  like  the  Being  whom  he  worships. 

It  has  not  yet  been  said  that  the  same  relation  of  cause 
and  effect  holds  good  in  the  case  of  the  modem  world's  con- 
ception of  God  and  its  moral  and  spiritual  state;  and  yet 
the  available  facts  are  jnst  as  convincing.  Look  at  the  sit- 
nation.  The  three  things  most  frequently  postulated  con- 
cerning God  are,  first,  that  He  is  love;  second,  that  He  is 
onr  Father;  third,  that  He  is  immanent  in  the  imiverse  of 
which  He  is  the  Creator.  And  of  the  three,  the  most  fre- 
quently affirmed  and  the  universally  accepted  is  that  He  is 
Love.  Even  when  men  think  of  Him  as  Father,  it  is  as  the 
loving  Father.  And  even  when  they  talk  of  His  immanence, 
they  dwell  upon  the  fact  that  He  is  immanent  in  love.  The 
stupendous  fact  that  God  is  Love  has  captnred  the  imag- 
ination of  Christendom. 

Now,  rightly  interpreted  and  viewed  in  its  relation  to 
the  whole  body  of  revealed  truth,  that  one  of  the  eternal 
verities  is  of  superlative  value  to  mankind.  "When  John 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  302.    1 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


144  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

wrote  hie  copulative  Beoteoce  in  his  first  epistle,  he  inaug- 
urated a  new  era  in  Christian  nnderetanding."  But  right 
there  lies  the  crux  of  the  existing  situation.  This  truth  is 
not  rightly  interpreted,  and  it  Is  viewed  entirely  apart 
from  its  relation  to  the  whole  body  of  truth.  In  tliat  state- 
ment I  am  not  referring  to  the  fact  that  most  of  our  mod- 
em theology  is  not  orthodox,  bat  to  the  obvious  fact  that 
the  popular  or  prevailing  idea  of  Ood  is  as  far  from  the 
truth  as  is  the  ex-Emperor's.  "We  hold  in  our  mind 
conceptions  of  Ood  that  are  not  much  t>etter  than  the 
Kaiser's."  In  his  discussion  of  "  The  Unity  of  God's  Char- 
acter," William  Newton  Clarke  says: — 

"  We  ascribe  to  God  certain  qualities  of  character,  set 
forth  in  familiar  terms,  but  when  we  come  to  define  them 
we  are  under  the  influence  of  our  own  limitations,  and  how- 
ever large  and  worthy  the  terms  that  we  use,  our  concep- 
tions are  sure  to  become  narrowed  toward  the  dimensions 
of  humanity.  Naturally,  if  not  inevitably,  we  bring  the 
perfection  of  God  down  towards  our  own  imperfections." 

That  is  exactly  what  has  happmed  in  the  present  in- 
stance. The  common  man  has  reduced  the  statemeut  "  Ood 
is  Love  "  to  the  perilous  proportions  of  the  half-truth.  The 
equally  momentous  fact  that  He  is  holy,  that  "  our  God  is 
a  consuming  fire,"  has  been  almost  absolutely  obliterated 
from  his  consciousness.  Whether  right  or  wrong  from  the 
standpoint  of  a  strictly  orthodox  theology,  men  look  upon 
Ood  as  their  Father.  They  have  forgotten  that  he  is  like- 
wise their  Creator;  tbeir  Sovereign,  to  whom  they  owe 
allegiance;  and  their  Judge,  before  whom  they  must  stand 
at  last  and  give  an  account  of  "  the  deeds  done  in  the 
fiesh." 

Furthermore,  the  modem  idea  of  God  errs  not  only  in 
its  isolation  of  the  central  truth  of  the  Gospel,  but  In  its 
distortion  of  that  truth.  The  perfection  of  Ood  has  been 
brought  down  to  onr  imperfections.  Or,  in  the  blatant 
words  of  tbe  skeptic  IngersoU,  "  man  has  created  Ood  in 
his  own  image."  The  love  of  Ood  has  been  evacuated  of 
all  ethical  significance  and  all  consequent  spiritual  com- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Need  of  a  New  Conception  of  Ood  145 

pulaion.  It  has  been  tranelated  into  terms  of  mawkish 
s^timentalism.  In  these  days  of  a  minimised  parental 
authority,  the  average  man  bdieree  in  a  Fatherhood  of 
Ood  devoid  of  all  moral  and  spiritual  exactions.  He  has 
not  thonght  the  matter  out  calmly  and  thoroughly,  for  he 
does  not  do  tilings  that  way.  But  "  there  is  a  logic  of  the 
hopes  and  fears  that  insidiously  smug^es  its  conclusions 
into  the  realm  of  the  intellect."  By  this  devious  and  peril- 
ous route  he  has  come  to  two  more  or  less  clearly  defined 
convictions. 

The  first  is  ttiat  God  is  not  very  exacting  with  His  weak 
and  erring  children.  This  kindly  disposed  and  thoroughly 
indulgent  parent  not  only  does  not  hold  His  imperfect 
children  blameworthy  for  their  shortcomings,  but  He  will- 
ingly accepts  generosity  in  place  of  righteousness,  human- 
itarian activities  as  a  substitute  for  "  nnspottedness  from 
the  world,"  and  spasms  of  virtuous  emotion  as  something 
"  just  as  good  "  as  the  surrender  of  the  will. 

The  other  conviction  or  vague  feeling  which  men  have 
about  God  to-day  is  that  He  is  eternally  accessible.  It  is 
not  so  much  a  belief  that  they  will  have  in  the  next  world  a 
chance  to  measure  up  to  the  rigid  requirements  of  a  moral 
and  morally  exacting  God  as  it  is  that  this  easy-going 
quality  in  the  Divine  character  is  permanent ;  thus  making 
the  salvation  of  aU  men,  however  far  short  they  may  have 
fallen  of  the  Christian  requirement,  an  assured  fact.  The 
average  man,  in  his  loose  thinking,  has  not  postulated  a 
second  probation.  He  has  done  away  with  the  idea  of  pro- 
bation entirely.  In  a  strikingly  calm,  dispassionate  article 
on  "Beligion  in  War  Times,"  published  in  The  Atlantic 
Monthly  of  September,  1918,  Dr.  William  Ernest  Hocking, 
Professor  of  Philosophy  at  Harvard  University,  says  of 
the  soldier  who  enlisted  in  the  Allied  cause : — 

"Always  there  is  something  that  sets  this  particular  act 
of  dedication  [enlistment]  apart  in  the  mind  of  the  decider. 
...  It  tends  to  put  him  on  fnndamental  good  terms  with 
the  invisible  universe  as  with  visible  society.  And  it  is 
likely  to  serve  as  an  nnuttered  argument  to  the  eftect  that 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


146  Bibliotkeca  Sacra  [April, 

Qod,  if  there  be  a  Ood,  will  oot  be  too  hard  on  him,  what- 
ever happens." 

It  is  nnnecessary  at  tliis  time  to  enlarge  on  the  (act  that 
a  vast  number  of  good  people  have  translated  that  vague 
feeling  into  a  certainty,  and  affirmed  without  hesitation 
that  "  going  over  the  top  "  means  salvation.  It  is  quite 
essential,  however,  to  call  attention  to  the  yet  more  sig- 
nificant fact  that  vast  numbers  who  never  saw  the  front- 
line trenches  are  obsessed  with  the  idea  that  "  Ood  will 
not  be  too  hard  on  them,  whatever  happens."  In  the  three 
years  just  passed,  especially,  I  have  talked  with  all  sorts 
and  conditions  of  men,  with  men  to  each  of  whom  it  might 
truthfully  be  said,  "  Many  tilings  thou  lackeat " ;  and  I 
found  them  all  complacent  and  calm  as  regards  their 
future.  As  one  dissolute  man  said,  "  If  my  Father  won't 
take  care  of  me,  who  will?"  Or,  as  another  put  it,  in 
speaking  of  a  mutual  friend  who  had  passed  through  a 
period  of  genuine  conviction  of  sin,  "  That's  all  bosh.  The 
Almighty  doesn't  require  that  of  anybody." 

The  prevailing  opinion  as  to  the  destiny  of  those  who 
have  died,  whatever  their  moral  and  spiritual  state  at  the 
time  of  their  exit,  is  plainly  stated  by  Elizabeth  Aahe  in 
her  story  "Appraisement,"  also  published  in  The  Atlantic 
Monthly.  The  story  tiegins  with  the  announcement  of 
Alan  Reid's  suicide,  and  the  subsequent  discovery  of  his 
young  widow  that  he  had  been  a  defaulter  of  trust  funds, 
and,  at  the  time  of  his  death,  was  living  in  illicit  relations 
with  his  secretaiy.  Indignant  and  ashamed,  she  went  to 
call  on  his  mother,  but  found  her  enumerating  his  good 
qualities  as  a  child.  Together  they  read  his  old  letters, 
enlarged  upon  his  cast-off  virtues,  and  decided  that,  in 
spite  of  the  fact  that  he  went  out  of  this  world  a  thief,  an 
adulterer,  and  a  suicide,  he  would  ultimately  be  all  right. 
The  author  sums  up  her  philosophy  in  a  final  statement 
which  she  puts  into  the  mouth  of  the  young  widow :  "  Past 
and  present  are  only  a  part  of  a  life.  There's  the  fntore, 
the  long  future  to  complete  him.  He  will  go  on  —  with 
us,  dear." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Need  of  a  New  Conception  of  Ood  147 

In  Dr.  Hocking's  analTsia  of  the  cousciousneeB  of  tbe 
soldier,  and  Elizabeth  Ashe's  doctrine  of  the  destiny  of  a 
scoundrel,  we  have  the  modem  idea  of  Ood  at  perigee  and 
apogee.  Not  only  tbe  man  who  enlisted,  but  also  the  aen- 
timentaliste  of  all  shades,  the  intellectaalists,  and  as  many 
of  the  social  idealists  as  believe  in  a  future  at  all,  have 
taken  the  yearning  of  "  the  larger  hope,"  and  tbe  hypothe- 
sis of  "  the  upward  thrust  by  a  Universal  Spirit,"  and  "  tbe 
half  truths  and  false  psychology  of  popular  altruism," 
and  the  erroneous  conclusions  of  ChriBtian  Science,  and 
evolved  either  an  indulgent  Parent  who  is  too  tender- 
hearted to  punish  anybody  or  an  automatic  salvation  in 
which  aU  men  are  included,  willy-nilly. 

It  is  to  be  expected  that  such  views  of  Ood  and  destiny 
would  rob  religion  of  its  solemnity,  life  of  its  moral  com- 
pulsion, and  conscience  of  its  authority.  Fifty  years  ago, 
in  bis  sermon  entitled  "  One  Chance  Better  than  Many," 
Horace  Bushnell  pointed  out  the  psychological  stupidity 
and  moral  peril  of  snch  a  flabby  and  unethical  faith,  if  it 
can  be  called  a  faith.  To  assume  for  a  moment  that  man 
can  spend  his  whole  life  here  consciously  choosing  the  lower 
and  inferior,  letting  the  animal  in  bim  dominate  the  spir- 
itual, substituting  self-will  for  the  will  of  Ood,  and  then, 
in  the  next  world,  by  some  magical  power  of  Divine  love, 
either  be  made  selfish  and  blessed  at  the  same  time  or 
be  transformed  into  an  angel  of  light,  is  to  do  violence 
to  all  the  teachings  of  psychology  and  to  corrupt  human 
life  at  its  center.  "  It  is  a  very  self-evident  fact  that  if 
we  had  two  or  more  trials  offered  us,  we  should  be  utterly 
slack  and  n^lectful  in  the  flret  and  should  bring  it  to  its 
end  almost  inevitably  in  a  condition  utterly  unhopeful." 
It  is  just  as  true  of  ideas  as  it  is  of  men,  that  "  by  their 
fruits  ye  shall  know  them."  To  put  it  subjectively,  and  to 
use  a  sorely  overworked  and  much  abused  Scripture  say- 
ing, "as  he  thinketh  in  his  heart,  so  is  he."  Experience 
proved  to  John  Wesley  that  a  liberal  theology  does  not 
always  connote  a  low  moral  character  in  the  individual, 
for  he  found  that  there  were  heterodox  saints  as  well  as 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


148  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [^V^> 

orthodox  sinnere.  But  hlHtorical  experience  haa  proved  be- 
yond peradventnre  that  a  flabby  and  unethical  conception 
of  God,  comprehending  a  "posthumous  salvation,"  —  what". 
Bnshnell  ironically  calls  "  a  basement  gospel,"  —  reacts 
disastrously  upon  the  race  as  a  whole.  It  is  the  merest 
commonplace  that  the  element  of  reverence  has  gone  from 
our  modem  religion.  With  the  sense  of  Ood's  holiness  has  ' 
gone  the  sense  of  man's  sinfulness,  and  with  the  ethical 
conception  of  the  Divine  character  has  gone  much  of  the 
reality  from  our  religion.  There  is  no  use  in  contrasting 
the  Present  and  the  Past,  in  putting  the  worst  of  to-day 
beside  the  best  of  yesterday.  Bat  neither  is  anything  to 
Ik  gained  by  glossing  over  the  facte.  The  triad  of  sins 
which  curses  the  modem  world  is  made  up  of  Hypocrisy, 
Compromise,  and  Presumption.  There  are  many  in  the 
charch  who  are  substituting  philanthropic  activity  for 
spiritual  vitality,  formal  religion  for  a  saving  faith,  for- 
getting God's  insistent  demand,  "  Wash  you,  make  you 
cleau ;  put  away  the  evil  of  your  doings  from  before  mine 
eyes."  Vain  oblations  have  changed  in  outer  aspect,  but 
they  are  still  offered  by  those  who  dream  of  a  God  who 
can  be  placated  by  gifts.  The  excuse  that  "  a  man  must 
live"  is  offered  iu  exteunation  for  corrupt  business  prac- 
tices and  participation  in  questionable  enterprises.  In- 
stead of  a  social  order  based  upon  the  clear  consciousness 
that  "  you  can't  compromise  on  the  big  things  of  life,"  we 
have  what  Howells  gently  designates  as  "  that  easy-going, 
not  evilly-intentioned  potential  immorality,  which  regards 
common  property  as  common  prey."  The  universal  assump- 
tion is  that  the  exalted  ethic  of  revealed  truth  must  give 
way  before  the  pressure  of  individual  physical  necessities 
and  a  hostile  social  order.  The  astounding  thing  about 
the  world  in  general  is  not  that  moral  laxity  exists,  but 
that  in  a  multitude  of  cases  it  is  justified  by  the  specious 
plea  of  "  moral  freedom."  And  while  the  world  war  has 
modified  some  of  these  evils,  it  has  left  others  untouched. 
There  are  not  wanting  those  who  say  that  all  this  is 
due  to  the  lack  of  a  "  social  consciousness."  Unless  I  have 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Need  of  a  2few  Conception  of  Ood  149 

read  both  my  Bible  and  my  history  upside  down,  it  is  due, 
primarily  at  least,  to  the  lack  of  a  "  God  consciousneeB," 
a  deep  and  overwhelming  realisation  that  Ood's  love  is 
ethical,  God  Himself  is  inexorably  exacting,  abd  "life  is 
ethical  from  the  outBet."  There  is  a  growing  "  disdain  for 
consequences,"  because  there  are  no  conseqaences  serious 
enou^  to  be  concerned  about.  The  occasional  plea  of  the 
old-fashioned  preacher  to  "  flee  from  the  wrath  to  come  " 
is  received  with  supercilious  scorn  or  hilarious  contempt. 
The  simple  and  comfortable  fact  is  that  there  is  nothing 
to  flee  from.  The  average  man  has  answered  Joseph  Cook's 
question,  "  Is  there  nothing  in  God  to  fear?  "  with  just  two 
words,  —  "  absolutely  nothing."  And  so  he  either  contents 
himself  with  spiritual  .minimums,  the  calm  confidence  that 
"  God,  if  there  be  a  God,  will  not  be  too  hard  on  him,  what- 
ever happens,"  or  the  satisfying  hypothesis  that  the  mys- 
terious and  unknown  forces  of  another  life  will  effect  in 
his  indifferent  soul  the  needed  transformation  which  the 
exigencies  of  this  life  could  not. 

Obviously,  then,  any  serious  attempt  to  make  the  new 
social  order  Christian  must  be  accompanied  by  a  rediscov- 
ery of  the  Christian  God.  And  that  means  that  we  must 
turn  from  the  philosophers  and  sentimentalists  and  intel- 
lectuals and  social  idealists,  and  endeavor  to  comprehend 
"the  God  and  Father  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,"  revealed 
to  us  not  only  in  what  Jesus  said  but  also  iu  what  he  was 
and  did.  It  is  not  within  the  purpoBe  of  this  paper  to  at- 
tempt anything  like  an  outline  of  the  Christian  doctrine 
of  God ;  but  it  is,  to  insist  that  any  doctrine  or  conception 
worthy  of  the  name  Christian  must  emphasize  the  ethical 
consistency  and  unity  of  the  Divine  character.  One  thing 
that  the  race  needs  "  in  order  to  full  goodneBS  "  is  a  clear 
knowledge  of  the  elements  that  go  to  make  up  Perfect  Per- 
sonality, "  with  a  perception  of  what  they  mean  and  what 
they  require."  Two  generations  ago  men  needed  to  be  told 
that  "  God  is  Love,"  that  He  is  on  their  side.  To-day  they 
need  to  know  that  God'e  love  is  moral  through  and  through, 
that  He  is  not  on  their  side  unless  they  heed  His  voice  and 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


160  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

do  His  will.  The  modern  world  sadly  needs  a  re-emphasifi 
of  God's  holiness  and  of  the  retributive  element  which  in- 
heres in  that  hoUnesfl.  A  legal  enactment  is  not  necessary 
in  order  that  evil-doers  be  punished.  The  severity  of  the 
Heavoity  Father  Is  as  essential  to  His  Fatherhood  as  Is 
His  goodness.  Or,  putting  the  troth  in  the  terms  of  cause 
and  effect,  so  popular  in  this  scientific  age,  the  consequences 
of  sin  are  written  into  the  moral  universe  and  the  nature 
of  man,  a  moral  being.  Furthermore,  "  a  good  God  de- 
mands that  His  children  be  good,"  and  that  they  be  good 
here  and  now  or  suffer  the  consequences.  To  do  away  with 
the  crucial  character  of  man's  decision  as  to  the  fulfillment 
of  his  obligations  to  God,  the  probationary  character  of 
life,  and  "  the  strict  limitation  of  the  probationary  period 
to  this  life,"  is  to  deny  the  plain  and  explicit  teachings  of 
Jesus  Christ.  The  man  who  insists  upon  the  claim  that 
"  the  redemptive  purpose  of  God  must  continue  forever " 
ought  to  be  as  honest  as  was  Theodore  Parker  when  he  said, 
"  I  believe  that  Jesus  Christ  taught  the  everlasting  pun- 
ishment of  the  wicked,  but  I  refuse  to  accept  it  on  his 
authority."  He  ought  to  go  farther  and  admit  that  his 
God  is  not  the  Christian  God.  Soft  and  easy  conceptions 
of  God  have  no  place  in  Holy  Writ.  In  a  terrific  arraign- 
ment of  the  ex-Kaiser  and  a  most  melancholy  prophecy  of 
his  probable  destiny,  Lyman  Abbott  says: — 

"  I  believe  that  he  will  pass,  as  we  all  must  pass,  from 
the  deceptive  lights  and  theatric  shows  of  this  world  to  the 
revealing  lights  and  stem  judgments  of  the  world  to  come. 
There  he  will  stand  for  judgment  before  Him  who  denounced 
as  a  generation  of  vipers,  fit  only  to  be  cast  out  as  the  offal 
of  the  universe  to  be  destroyed  by  the  fires  of  Gehenna, 
those  who  had  devoured  widows'  houses  and  made  long 
prayers. ...  I  have  no  power  to  conceive  what  divine  scorn 
and  wrath  he  will  confront  who  has  spread  over  half  a 
continent,  poverty,  famine,  disease,  slavery  and  death." 

Those  are  puissant  words,  and  right  well  do  they  sound 
in  an  age  of  soft  phrases  and  honied  drippings.  But  is 
William  HohenzoUem  to  face  Almighty  God  in  solitary 
shame  and  terror?     Upon  him  alone  are  the  scorn  and 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Need  of  a  New  Conception  of  Ood  151 

wrath  of  an  outraged  Deity  to  be  poured  out?  What  of 
the  whited  sepnlchers,  b;  no  means  all  "  made  in  Ger- 
many," who  are  beantiful  without  but  within  are  full  of 
dead  men's  bones  and  all  undeanness?  And  the  profiteers 
who,  even  though  they  buy  Liberty  Bonds  and  sing  "  The 
Star  Spangled  Banner"  with  tearfol  eyes,  justify  Samuel 
Johnson's  blistering  affirmation  that  "  patriotism  is  the 
last  refuge  of  a  scoundrel"?  And  the  impure,  who  would 
insult  a  holy  God  by  attempting  to  offer  Him  physical 
courage  in  place  of  a  clean  heart?  And  the  apostles  of 
compromise,  between  whose  private  life  and  business  prac- 
tices is  a  "great  gulf  fixed"?  And  the  horde  of  selfish 
and  indiflFerent  who,  in  the  presence  of  the  unending  con- 
flict between  the  forces  of  righteousness  and  forces  of 
evil,  turn  a  deaf  ear  to  the  cry,  "  Come  up  to  the  help  of 
the  Lord,  to  the  help  of  the  Lord  against  the  mighty"? 
Is  it  true  that  God  will  not  be  too  hard  on  them  or  that 
the  upward  thrust  of  a  Universal  Goodness  will  bring 
them  at  last  to  blessedness  and  perfection,  while,  cower- 
ing under  the  fui7  of  an  indignant  Creator,  William  II. 
suffers  the  punishment  he  so  richly  deserves? 

The  case  may  be  summed  up  in  a  sentence,  "  When  thy 
judgments  are  on  the  earth,  then  shall  its  inhabitants 
learn  righteousness."  The  part  of  Dr.  Abbott's  philippic 
which  needs  to  be  burned  into  the  consciousness  of  the 
race  is  "  as  we  aU  must  pass."  When  men  know  clearly 
and  fee]  keenly  that  "  Gk>d  cannot  be  an  enswathing  kiss 
without  also  being  a  consuming  fire " ;  that  His  love  is 
ethical  and  inexorably  exacting;  that  His  insistent  demand 
is  "  for  a  careful  ordering  of  the  present  life  as  antecedent 
to  and  determinant  of  future  destiny";  then,  and  then 
only,  shall  we  have  a  conception  of  the  Divine  character 
consistent  with  the  inspired  word  of  His  revelation,  justi- 
fied by  psychology  and  historical  erperience,  and  provoca- 
tive of  holy  living  and  holy  dying.  A  Christian  social 
order  or  a  widespread  spiritual  quickening  of  the  race 
without  a  clear,  Christian  conception  of  God  is  a  moral 
impossibility. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


SIN  IN  THE  LIGHT  OP  TO-DAY 

MISS   OLITII    M.   WINCHBSTBK 
NAMPAj  IDAHO 

With  the  progress  along  scientific  linee,  tbe  developing 
of  philosophical  thought  and  speculation,  and  the  remold- 
ing of  religious  beliefs  and  theological  dogma,  many  of  the 
doctrines  of  the  old  ecclesiasticistus  have  undergone  ma- 
terial change.  Sometimes  the  alteration  has  been  quite  a 
radical  one;  for  instance,  in  the  view  of  deity  as  imma- 
nent in  contradistinctioD  to  the  belief  in  the  transcendence 
of  the  Oodhead.  At  other  times  the  variation  appears  to 
be  rather  in  the  method  of  approach  than  in  the  change  of 
the  fundamental  conception  itself.  This  is  apparent  in 
the  doctrine  of  the  Incarnation.  The  fact  of  an  incarna- 
tion remains  the  same,  whether  it  is  approached  by  the 
dogmatic  method  of  the  more  conservative  advocates  or  the 
philosophical  method  of  the  liberal  theologians,  although 
the  latter  view  raises  grave  textual  problems.  As  long 
aa  the  modifications  in  dogma  vere  confined  to  the  more 
speculative  issues,  tbe  immediate  effect  was  not  so  great; 
but  when  these  began  to  toucb  the  ethical  and  practical 
problems,  naturally  there  would  be  certain  corresponding 
results.  In  the  consideration  of  the  question  of  sin,  we 
touch  a  decidedly  ethical  and  practical  issue.  If  the  con- 
ception of  sin  is  so  modified  that  it  becomes  a  necessary 
concomitant  of  man's  development,  —  in  fact,  if  it  is  no 
more  than  good  in  the  making,  —  then,  necessarily,  the 
gravity  and  heinonsness  of  sin  disappears;  and  man's  re- 
sponsibility and  guilt  for  sin  is  thereby  lessened,  if  not 
eradicated  altogether.  Thus,  in  a  case  like  this,  it  is  the 
part  of  wisdom  to  alter  fundamental  conceptions  with 
caution,  and  to  look  weU  to  the  outcome  of  any  change 
before  the  modification  is  made. 

Before  turning  directly  to  the  subject,  however,  it  is 
necessary,  since  the  question  of  sin  is  such  a  ramified  one, 
to  institute  a  process  of  elimination,  that  it  may  be  clearly 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Sin  in  the  Light  of  To-day  153 

onderstood  just  which  phase  of  the  issue  is  to  be  treated. 
Together  with  sin  comeB  the  query  of  origin,  —  both  meta- 
physical and  nOQ-temporal  and  also  temporal.  Then  also 
theodicy  would  become  a  part  of  a  full  discusaioo  of  the 
subject.  Moreover,  the  relation  of  sin  to  human  destiny 
would  be  a  consideration  to  be  taken  into  accoont.  But 
these  will  be  dismissed  for  the  time  being,  and  simply  the 
oature  and  essence  of  sin  will  be  discnssed,  together  with 
some  closely  allied  features  which  are  sometimes  confused 
with  sin. 

With  this  view  of  the  subject  in  mind,  we  will  consider 
some  of  the  modem  definitions  and  analyses  of  sin.  First, 
we  shall  take  up  the  scientific  exposition  of  natural  sci- 
ence, the  evolutionary  solution  of  the  problem.  From  the 
point  of  view  of  pan-evolution  there  would  be  no  dlscoa- 
tinuity  between  man  and  the  beast.  Sin  would  be  the  in- 
heritance received  from  the  animal  ancestry,  and  all  that 
it  would  be  necessary  for  man  to  do  would  be  to 
"Move  upward,  working  out  Uie  beast, 
And  let  tlie  ape  and  tiger  die." 

In  such  a  view  sin  is  inevitable,  and  the  responsibility  en- 
tailed on  man  for  its  possesBion  is  reduced  to  the  test  as 
to  whether  he  does  move  upward  or  not.  If  he  falls  to 
work  out  the  beast  that  is  in  him,  then  he  must  needs  be 
responsible.  Another  evolutionary  view  is  that  when  man 
was.  in  the  transitiouary  stage  from  the  non-moral  to  the 
moral,  instead  of  fulfilling  the  ideal  upon  entering  the 
realm  of  moral  consciousness,  he  came  short,  he  stumbled 
and  fell.  With  this  view  comes  a  real  responsibility  for 
sin,  and  this  also  reveals  to  some  extent  the  inherent  na- 
ture; it  is  the  falling  short  of  the  ideal  of  the  type  for  man 
and  the  subservience  to  the  lower  instincts. 

Besides  the  scientific  explanation  of  the  problem  of  sin, 
the  philosophical  thinkers  have  also  contributed  a  solu- 
tion. Kant  maintains  that  there  is  in  man  a  radical  evil 
principle.  Julius  MflUer  sums  up  the  view  of  Hegel  as 
follows: — "As  to  the  nature  of  evil,  Hegel  makes  it  consist 
in  abstract  subjectivity,  or,  more  exactly,  in  arbitrariness, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


151  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

—  in  makiDg  seW  the  ruling  principle,  instead  of  uoiversal 
good,  —  In  the  subject's  recognition  of  his  individuality 
as  that  which  determines  him,  so  far  as  it  asserts  some 
subjective  interest  in  opposition  to  moral  good."  In  con- 
tradistinction to  these  subjective  views,  Bchopenhauer 
finds  Bin  in  the  constitution  of  the  world,  and  Rotfae  seeks 
the  origin  in  matter. 

With  the  statements  of  these  two  great  philosophers,  we 
turn  to  the  statements  of  modem  theologians.  First  to  be 
considered  here  is  Schleiermacher,  the  father  of  the  mod- 
em theological  movement.  In  his  conception  of  the  hu- 
man will,  he  was  a  determinist,  and  attributed  all  cau- 
sality to  God.  The  Divine  Being,  although  not  considered 
to  be  the  author  of  sin  in  the  same  way  that  he  was  the 
author  of  redemption,  yet  was  in  some  sense  its  author. 
This  reasoning  involves  the  difficulty  of  making  God  the 
author  of  that  which  was  in  direct  contradistinction  to 
his  will.    The  solution  offered  was  this: — 

"  There  are  two  elements  combined  in  every  act  of  sin, 
namely,  the  outgo  of  a  sensuous  impulse,  and  the  conscious- 
ness of  God.  We  derive  both  without  hesitation  from  the 
etemal  causality  of  God;  bat  both  taken  together  do  not 
in  themselves  constitute  sin.  .  Sin  only  ensues  when  the 
determining  power  of  the  God-consciousness  is  inadequate, 
when  compared  with  the  strength  of  the  natural  impulse. 
But  we  must  r^ard  this  weakness  of  the  God-consciousness 
at  any  given  stage  of  our  life,  as  rising  from  the  gradnal- 
ness  of  our  spiritual  development,  and  from  the  conditions 
of  our  present  state  of  existence;  and  the  original  or  idetd 
perfection  of  man  is  not  thus  done  away.  But  sin,  as  such, 
thus  resolves  itself  into  a  mere  negation,  and  no  mention 
can  be  made  of  a  productive  or  generating  will  of  God  In 
connection  with  it."  ^ 

Thus  we  see  that  Schleiermacher  closely  associates  sin  with 
the  sensuous  nature;  it  is  the  outgo  of  a  sensuous  impulse 
which  is  stronger  than  the  God-consciousness.  He  also, 
whUe  rejecting  the  orthodox  doctrine  of  original  sin,  sub- 
stitutes an  explanation  for  the  phraomena.  He  calls  it 
"  the  collective  guUt  of  the  race,"  and  maintains  that  not 
'MttUer,  Th©  Chrt«Uan  Doctrine  of  Sin. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Sin  in  the  Light  of  To-day  155 

only  does  sin  come  from  within  man,  as  in  the  case  of  the 
impulse  of  the  seasuous  nature,  but  it  also  comes  from 
without  in  this  sense  of  collective  guilt;  and  thereby 
arises  our  absolute  need  of  redemption. 

While  Schleiermacher  thus  associates  sin  with  the  sen- 
suous nature  of  man,  or,  rather,  explains  it  on  the  basis 
of  "  the  relative  weakness  of  the  spirit  compared  with  the 
sense,"  MQller  finds  the  principle  of  sin  in  selfishness: 
"The  I,  that  gloomy  despot,  rules  supreme;  man  stands 
alone  in  the  world,  shut  op  within  himself,  and  in  a  chaos 
of  selfish  endeavours,  preferences  and  antipathies."  Man 
desires  to  be  his  own  master.  But  this  principle  does  not 
remain  n^ative  altogether;  there  is  an  outgo  in  it;  there 
is  an  attachment  to  some  worldly  affection.  Then  direct 
acts  of  sin  result  by  the  working  of  this  desire  in  the  heart 
of  man.  At  first  the  better  self  in  man,  the  understanding 
and  the  will,  is  antagonistic  to  this  dominance  of  the 
lower  impulses,  but  finally  even  these  surrender  to  the 
control  of  the  lower  self.  All  through  the  various  manifes- 
tations of  sin,  this  selfish  tendency  is  evident.  It  is  ap- 
parent in  covetousneas,  falsehood,  pride,  love  of  power, 
injustice,  hatred,  and  the  other  forms. 

While  Mflller  finds  sin  in  selfishness,  Ritschl  specifies 
that  its  source  is  ignorance.  According  to  his  conception, 
man  ttegins  as  a  purely  natural  being  with  self-seeking 
propensities,  and  with  a  moral  will  only  partially  devel- 
oped ;  this  moral  will  is  a  growing  entity.  Since  sin  thus 
has  its  root  in  ignorance,  the  sense  of  guilt  is  lessened, 
for  man  cannot  be  held  responsible  for  that  which  he  does 
not  know  alwut.  Moreover,  it  would  also  seem  that  sin 
is  unavoidable,  for  it  arises  through  the  natural  tendency 
of  man  unde^oing  development.  Altogether  this  theory 
does  not  seem  to  give  a  very  thoroughgoing  estimate  of 
the  gravity  of  sin.  As  for  original  sin,  Bitachl  rejects  the 
existence  of  this  form  of  evil,  but  instead  maintains  the 
presence  of  social  heredity,  that  is,  there  is  an  "inheri- 
tance of  evU  not  merely  by  individual  imitation  of  bad 
example,"  as  Pelagins  would  teach,  "but  by  the  inbreath- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


156  Bibliotheca  Sacra  ['^P^ 

ing  of  a  tainted  life.  Our  Unite  fleshly  nature  surrounds 
us  with  temptation  vhile  we  are  unformed;  and  social 
pressure  proves  IrreBiatible." ' 

In  contradistinction  to  the  foregoing,  Tennant  finds  the 
secret  of  sin  in  the  volitional  powers.  He  defines  tbus: 
"  Sin  will  be  imperfect  compliance  (in  single  volitional 
activity  or  in  character  resulting  from  such  activities) 
with  the  moral  ideal  in  bo  far  as  this  is,  in  the  sight  of 
God,  capable  of  apprehension  by  an  agent  at  the  moment 
of  the  activity  in  question,  both  as  to  its  content  and  its 
claim  upon  him;  this  imperfect  compliance  being  conse- 
quent upon  choice  of  ends  of  lower  ethical  worth  when  the 
adoption  of  ends  of  higher  worth  is  possible,  and  being 
regarded  in  its  religions  aspect  (which  may  in  some  cases 
be  wanting)."  In  this  way  he  feels  that  sin  is  differen- 
tiated from  infirmity,  temptation,  and  any  element  that  is 
closely  connected  with  sin.  Moreover,  this  gives  a  sound 
basis  for  culpability ;  for  "  volition,  and  volition  alone,  .  .  . 
is  sinful." 

Turning  from  British  and  German  theologians  to  Amer- 
ican thought,  we  find  in  Finney's  account  of  sin,  as  given 
by  Wright,*  an  explanation  based  principally  upon  the 
thought  of  human  depravity.  This  depravity  he  differen- 
tiates into  physical  and  moral.  By  physical  depravity  is 
meant,  when  the  application  is  to  the  mind,  that  the  men- 
tal powers  are  so  impaired  by  nature  that  "  the  healthy 
action  of  these  powers  is  not  snstained."  Then  moral  de- 
pravity constitutes  a  "  choice  at  variance  with  moral  right, 
and  is  synonymous  with  sin."  Moreover,  besides  this  state 
of  individual  depravity,  there  is  also  a  condition  of  uni- 
versal depravity.  This,  however,  as  in  the  case  of  the  in- 
dividual, is  not  due  to  any  inherited  evil  tendency,  but 
arises  as  soon  as  man  comes  to  the  age  of  responsibility 
or  "  moral  agency,"  because  of  the  weakness  of  human  na- 
ture through  physical  depravity.  Although  sin  lies  essen- 
tially in  "  an  act  of  the  will,"  yet,  owing  to  a  "  physically 

'  Mackintosh,  Chrlitlanltr  and   Sin. 

'Wright,  Charlflfl  OFandlson  Flnner. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Sin  in  the  Light  of  To-day  167 

depraved"  constitution,  the  presence  of  external  solicita- 
tiona  will,  unless  inhibited  by  supernatural  agency,  result 
universally  in  yielding  to  acts  of  sin.  Thus,  in  acme  re- 
spects there  is  an  agreement  between  Finney  and  Tennaot, 
in  that,  in  both,  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the  will  in  defining 
sin ;  but  Finney  lays  more  stress  upon  human  depravity, 
which  is  not  recognized  by  Tennant. 

Although  many  other  authorities  might  be  cited,  yet 
these  give  at  least  some  idea  of  the  various  interpretations 
given  to  sin.  In  summing  up,  we  have  the  designation 
brute  inheritance,  a  radical  evil  principle  in  man,  arbi- 
trariness, in  the  constitution  of  the  world,  in  matter,  the 
feebleness  of  the  Ood-conscioosness,  and  the  consequent 
assertion  of  the  sensuous  impulses,  selflsbnesa,  ignorance, 
and  in  volition.  These  various  theories  may  be  classed 
first  as  subjective  and  objective,  or  may  be  defined  as  those 
which  find  sin  in  the  inner  life  of  man  and  those  which  find 
sin  in  matter.  The  definitions  to  be  included  under  the 
latter  head  wonld  be  the  location  of  sin  in  the  constitu- 
tion of  the  world  and  in  matter.  These  theories,  however, 
do  not  play  a  large  part  in  the  theological  conceptions,  so 
may  be  set  aside  as  samples  of  the  solution  offered  by  a 
small  number  to  this  problem.  In  taking  up  the  rest,  the 
question  arises  whether  the  nature  of  sin  is  not  found  in 
the  fusion  of  these  various  thoughts  rather  than  in  the 
single  idea  contained  in  any  one  of  them.  Yet  there  must 
be  some  central  thought  around  which  the  others  may 
cluster.  Accordingly  we  need  to  search  for  the  underlying 
principle  of  sin. 

In  whatever  way  we  define  the  nature  of  sin,  there  is 
one  fact  very  evident  —  that  sin  is  a  tragic  element  in  the 
lives  of  individuals,  states,  and  nations.  This  troth  comes 
home  with  more  than  usual  emphasis  now  that  we  are  face 
to  face  with  the  greatest  war  that  the  world  has  ever 
known.  Moreover,  it  is  also  evident  that  sin  is  so  deep- 
rooted  in  the  heart  of  man  that  culture  alone  does  not 
necessarily  abate  its  manifestations  and  maliciousness. 
This  is  witnessed  to  by  the  fact  that  Germany,  the  land 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


158  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

where  Kultur  has  been  nourished  and  fostered,  has  shown 
herself  capable  of  committing  barbarities  equal  to  those 
of  the  nncivilized  nations  of  early  days.  The  day  has 
passed  when  the  shallow  optimism  of  Bousseau  could  find 
much  acceptance.  If  man  is  to  be  perfected,  there  must 
be  sometbiag  deeper  than  education  and  changed  social 
and  political  conditions.  In  fact,  the  majority  of  the  the- 
ories stated  indicate  the  thought  that  sin  is  deep-seated  in 
the  heart  of  man. 

With  these  conclusions  it  seems  that  Kant  has  given  the 
most  comprehensive  and  incisive  interpretation  of  the  na- 
ture of  sin  in  its  intieing  in  the  heart  of  man.  He  says 
that  it  is  a  '  radical  evil.'  Along  with  the  good  in  human 
nature  dwells  also  this  evil  principle. 

In  connection  with  the  Kantian  account  of  the  sinfol 
nature  of  man,  it  is  interesting  to  examine  the  Pauline 
hamartiology.  In  the  seventh  chapter  of  Romans  Paul 
gives  a  very  realistic  description  of  his  own  personal  ex- 
perience under  the  dominance  of  this  evil  principle.  It  is 
noticeable  all  ttirough  this  chapter  that  the  apostle  uses 
the  term  hamartia;  never  is  there  a  transfer  to  the  term 
hamartemas.  If  the  two  terms  were  synonymous,  it  would 
seem  that,  since  the  word  is  repeated  frequently,  the  latter 
term  would  be  substituted  occasionally;  but  this  is  not  so. 
In  regard  to  the  word  hamartia,  Thayer  states  that  in  the 
singular  it  is  used  to  indicate  the  principle  of  sin,  while 
the  plural  denotes  acts  of  sin.  This  being  so,  we  see,  then, 
that  Paul  is  speaking  of  an  evil  principle  in  his  nature. 
Further  we  note  some  facts  about  this  evil  principle.  In 
the  first  place,  it  did  not  become  a  moral  factor  in  the  life 
until  it  was  uncovered  and  revealed  by  the  law;  secondly, 
it  brought  in  bondage  the  will  of  man,  so  that  he  was  un- 
able to  do  the  things  he  would ;  and,  thirdly,  it  had  as  the 
place  of  its  activity  the  flesh,  which  is  used  synonymously 
with  the  term  "  members,"  used  in  reference  to  the  body, 
and  the  ego.  From  this  last  statement  it  has  been  inferred 
that  Paul  was  teaching  a  metaphysical  dualism,  and  con< 
sequently  the  evil  nature  of  the  fiesh ;  but  we  feel  that  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Hin  in  the  lAght  of  To-day  ISd 

dualism  ia  empirical  rather  tlian  metapliyaical.  The  flesh 
was  "  the  locus  of  sin'a  manifestatioo,"  but  was  not  inher- 
ently evil. 

With  this  last  thoaght  of  the  Pauline  ddineatlon  in 
mind,  we  have  suggestions  to  help  us  to  understand  what 
Tennant  terms  "  the  material  of  sin."  Under  this  desig- 
nation he  places  "  organic  craving,  appetite,  instinct,  im- 
pulse, and  desire."  Then  be  goes  on  to  say,  "  These  are 
non-moral,  as  is  also  voluntary  attitude  towards  them 
previously  to  acquisition  of  conscience;  yet  without  them 
there  could  not  be  sin.  In  that  pleasure  is  associated  with 
their  satisfaction,  th^  supply  the  basic  incentives  to  sin; 
and  in  that  they  are  called  into  play  in  independence  of 
moral  considerations,  their  presence  imposes  on  every 
moral  tieing  a  lifelong  moral  conflict,  failure  in  which,  at 
any  point,  is  sin.  This  is  the  ultimate  'explanation'  of 
sin.  These  propensities  are  also  neutral  in  respect  of  the 
moral  value  of  what  the  will  may  construct  out  of  them, 
and  necessary,  i.e.  biologically  essential  and  normal,  and 
psycho-physically  inevitable."  This  description  also  exerts 
a  reflex  influence  and  throws  light  upon  the  Pauline  pas- 
sage. The  term  "  flesh,"  then,  is  in  a  state  of  transition 
from  a  physical  designation  to  an  etbico-theological  sense. 
The  apostle  is  indicating  certain  tendencies  of  our  phys- 
ical nature  which  serve  as  the  base  of  activity  for  sin ; 
they  are  the  weaker  elements  in  our  organism.  In  and 
through  these  elements  the  radical  evil  in  man  becomes 
manifest.  Then  it  is  that  the  '  sacredness  of  the  person- 
ality' of  man  is  violated,  the  high  ideal  for  which  man 
was  constituted  is  blighted,  and  the  lower  nature  assumes 
a  dominance. 

At  this  point  it  might  be  objected  that,  inasmuch  as 
these  appetencies  of  our  nature  are  non-moral,  and  in 
man  there  are  principles  of  good  as  well  as  of  evil,  then 
the  power  of  volition  might  be  asserted,  to  prevent  these 
elements  becoming  the  avenues  for  the  activity  of  sin.  But 
the  fact  is  that  the  will  is  more  or  less  enslaved  under 
this  dominance  of  the  radical  evil.  This  is  evidenced  by  the 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  302.    2 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


160  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [^pril> 

Pauline  statemeDts  that  it  was  not  possible  to  do  the  things 
that  the  moral  reason  approved.  Moreover,  Schleiermacfaer 
indicates  a  similar  thought  when  he  speaks  of  the  weak- 
ness of  "  the  determining  power  of  the  Ood-conacionsness 
as  compared  with  the  strength  of  the  natural  impulse." 
Furthermore,  Mflller  states  that  finally  the  will,  and  evai 
the  understanding,  come  under  the  dominance  of  the  lower 
nature.  In  addition  to  these  authorities,  we  cite  the  evi- 
dence which  history  and  experience  afford,  that,  apart  from 
the  surrender  of  the  will  in  obedience  to  the  higher  Divine 
Will,  there  does  not  seem  to  be  the  power  in  man  to  resist 
the  dominance  of  the  lower  nature.  Man  only  becomes 
free  in  the  truest  sense  when  he  yields  in  submission  to 
Bim  who  can  make  him  "  free  indeed."  When  this  asser- 
tion is  made,  however,  it  is  not  intended  that  the  thought 
should  be  conveyed  that  in  the  dominance  of  the  lower 
nature  man  shows  himself  forth  in  the  entirety  of  evil  of 
which  bis  nature  may  be  capable;  but  that,  along  with  the 
virtues  that  may  exist,  there  is  also  a  certain  enslavement, 
more  evident  in  some  natures  than  in  others,  —  at  times 
it  is  quite  veOed,  and  again  it  is  quite  apparent. 

Having  now  analyzed  the  nature  of  sin  in  its  essence, 
its  place  of  activity,  and  its  resultant  effect  on  the  will, 
another  point  is  to  be  noted  —  the  differentiation  between 
sin  in  its  essence  and  in  its  manifestation.  The  evil  mt^ 
be  in  the  nature;  but  when  it  brealts  forth  into  an  overt 
act,  it  is  sin  manifested.  These  overt  acts  are  collectively 
designated  sins.  With  the  repetition  of  acts,  habits  are 
formed,  and  then  the  habits  constitute  a  character,  and 
thus  we  have  a  man  whom  we  designate  as  a  sinner.  The 
outward  manifestation  of  this  character  is  manifold.  At 
one  time  animal  passions  and  impulses  are  the  dominant 
traits,  at  another  arbitrariness,  and  again  selfishness  or 
pride;  but  all  have  their  root  in  the  evil  in  man's  nature. 
Thus  we  feel  that  the  various  analyses  of  sin  are  fused  in 
the  more  comprehensive  term,  unless  it  be  the  Bitschlian 
finding  concerning  sin,  that  it  is  due  to  ignorance,  which 
is  so  distinctive  that  it  requires  to  be  treated  by  itaelf. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Sin  in  the  Light  of  To-4ay  161 

Before  passing  on,  however,  to  the  discrimination  Ije- 
tweeai  sis  and  certain  closely  allied  elements,  It  vill  be 
well  to  note  the  relation  between  the  view  that  sin  is  a 
radical  evil  in  the  heart  of  man  to  the  teaching  of  Jesos. 
The  teaching  of  Paol  is  more  dialectic;  but,  quoting  Qo- 
guel,  "  la  prediction  de  J68Ufl  est  ertr&nement  simple,  com- 
plStement  ^trang^re  k  toutes  les  sabtilit^s  de  la  tbtologie."  * 
Accordingly  the  question  might  arise  whether  this  des- 
ignation of  a  radical  evil  in  man  is  simply  a  dialectic 
snbtlety  or  whether  it  is  also  foond  in  the  more  simple 
accounts  of  sin  given  by  Jesus.  First  there  comes  to  mind 
that  passage  which  says,  "  If  ye  then  being  evil,  know 
how  to  give  good  gifts  unto  your  children,"  etc.  Here  it 
would  seem  that  man  is  described  as  tainted  by  sin  with 
evil  inherent  in  his  nature.  Moreover,  there  is  also  the 
accotint  of  the  source  of  sinful  deeds.  It  is  said  that  they 
come  from  within,  out  of  the  heart  of  man.  If  there  were 
not  a  fountain  of  corruption  within,  there  would  not 
surely  issue  forth  such  turgid  streams  as  the  text  goes  on 
to  describe  (Matt.  zv.  19).  These  references  will  suffice 
to  show  that  at  least  the  teaching  of  Jesus  is  in  harmony 
with  the  Pauline  hamartiology  on  this  point,  and  conse- 
quently also  in  harmony  with  the  Kantian  postulate. 

Now  that  the  relation  of  the  teaching  of  Jesns  to  that 
of  Paul  and  Kant  has  been  established,  there  remains  to 
be  considered  the  differentiation  between  sin  and  infir- 
mity, also  sin  and  ignorance,  sin  and  temptation,  and  sin 
and  guilt.  There  are  certain  infirmities  which  are  con- 
comitant with  man's  present  state  of  existence.  There  are 
defects  in  understanding,  so  that  he  cannot  always  fully 
grasp  the  content  of  the  highest  ideal  for  his  life;  there 
are  defects  in  judgment  in  that  he  mistakes  the  means  to 
attain  this  ideal ;  there  are  defects  in  the  imaginative  pow- 
ers and  moral  discrimination  in  tliat  he  constructs  that  toi 
be  a  good  which  is  not  a  good.  Besides  these,  exist  many 
other  defects  which  more  or  less  hinder  the  individual  in 
the  realization  of  that  which  Is  highest  and  best;  but  these 
■Oogael,  L'ApAtre  Paul  et  J4bub  Christ. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


162  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

are  not  sins.  They  cause  mistakes  and  inrolimtary  riola- 
tions  of  the  sapreme  ideal  for  human  personality,  but  there 
is  no  volitional  moral  element  in  them.  The  purpose  and 
motive  of  the  heart  may  be  sincere  and  upright,  that  is, 
the  errors  may  arise  from  a  pure  source;  there  is  not 
necessarily  an  evil  in  the  background  of  their  production. 
Moreover,  sin  is  to  be  differentiated  from  ignorance. 
Here  we  wonld  revert  again  to  the  Pauline  delineation  in 
Rom.  vii.  The  first  thing  that  we  noted  was  that  the  evil 
in  the  heart  of  the  apostle  did  not  become  a  moral  (actor 
until  it  was  revealed  by  the  law,  that  ia,  knowledge  had  to 
enter  before  sin  was  made  known,  and  figured  as  a  moral 
entity.  In  keeping  with  this  are  statements  made  by 
Tennant.  He  says :  "  Mere  objective  incongruence  of  an 
act  with  a  standard  does  not  constitute  that  act  immoral; 
the  act  may  rather  be  simply  non-moral,  like  the  behavior 
of  animals  or  of  lifeless  things.  The  human  infant  is  non- 
moral  relatively  to  all  moral  ideals,  and  the  untaught 
-  heathen  relatively  to  all  but  the  crudest.  .  .  .  Sin,  then,  is 
not '  tran^:re8sion  of  the  law,'  but  transgression  of  a  moral 
law  by  an  agent  who,  at  the  time,  is  in  a  position  to  know 
the  content  of  the  law  and  that  it  is  binding  on  himself. 
This  time-reference  is  important."  On  the  other  hand, 
while  there  is  this  ignorance  that  is  innocent,  there  may 
be  an  ignorance  which  is  guilty;  so  that  it  would  not 
necessarily  follow  that  all  ignorance  is  sinless.  The  dif- 
ference lies  in  the  fact  whether  the  individual  or  individ- 
uals have  had  the  opportunity  of  knowing  the  moral  and 
religious  standard  of  life.  Accordingly  we  see  that  when 
Bitscht  grounds  sin  in  ignorance,  he  reaches  no  serious 
view  of  evil,  and  confuses  moral  distinctions. 

Again,  in  the  discriminations  of  moral  and  non-moral 
entities,  a  distinction  should  be  made  between  sin  and 
temptation.  Solicitation  to  evil  carries  no  moral  turpi- 
tude with  it.  There  is  a  vast  difference  between  solicita- 
tion to  evil  and  yielding  to  evil.  Temptations  constitute 
part  of  the  common  lot  of  mankind.  Elrperience  testifies 
to  this.  So  also  does  the  Scripture :  "  There  hath  no  temp- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  8m  in  the  Light  of  To-day  163 

tatioD  taken  jrou,  bat  such  as  is  common  to  man  "  (1  Cor. 
X.  13).  Moreover,  an  outstanding  proof  ttiat  solicitation 
to  evil  is  not  sinful  lies  in  tbe  fact  that  Jesus  was  tempted; 
and  the  sinlesauess  of  Jesus  is  admitted  even  by  those  who 
would  hesitate  to  avow  bis  divinity. 

Finally,  a  line  needs  to  be  drawn  between  sin  and  guilt. 
QuUt  entails  accountability ;  so  the  question  resolves  itself 
into  this,  When  is  sin  accountable?  Overt  acts  of  ain 
which  have  had  the  consent  of  the  individual  would  always 
be  accountable.  But  when  we  come  to  the  fact  of  the  rad- 
ical evil  principle  in  man,  the  question  is  a  more  subtle 
one.  It  would  hardly  be  considered  that  man  is  respon- 
sible for  that  which  he  has  had  no  part  in  infusing  into 
his  nature;  but,  on  the  other  baud,  he  might  be  responsible 
for  allowing  its  dominance  when  he  sees  the  possibility  of 
a  higher  life  through  the  mystical  union  with  Christ.  Thus 
while  sin  and  guilt  are  very  closely  allied,  they  are  not 
identical,  nor  does  one  necessarily  follow  from  the  other, 
although  very  frequently  th^  are  cocsistent 

The  nature  of  sin  in  its  essence  having  been  discussed, 
and  its  element'  set  off  from  closely  allied  features,  one 
more  question  might  be  considered;  and  that  is  the  tur- 
pitude of  ain.  Since  in  these  days  there  is  more  or  less 
indifference  to  the  heinousness  of  sin,  it  is  well  to  consider 
whether  there  are  not  certain  facts  which  reveal  the  ex- 
ceeding sinfulness  of  sin  as  well  as  certain  tendencies  that 
would  obscure  its  tme  nature.  The  emphasis  in  theology 
on  the  fatherhood  of  Ood  ought  to  arouse  in  man  the  sense 
of  his  ingratitude  and  utter  selfishness  when  he  separates 
himself  from  the  supreme  love  of  the  Divine  Being,  who 
tbns  would  receive  him  as  a  son.  The  transgression  against 
the  lore  of  a  father  ought  to  set  sin  in  a.  bolder  relief  than 
the  transgression  of  law  for  which  one  must  give  an  ac- 
count to  the  Righteous  Judge,  which  was  the  dominating 
conception  in  the  older  theologies.  Moreover,  the  emphasis 
in  recent  philosophy  on  personality  ought  again  to  awak^ 
the  sense  of. the  turpitude  of  sin.  This  evaluation  of  per- 
sonality is  in  keeping  with  the  teaching  of  Jesus.  Fletcher 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Ifil  Bibliotheca  Sacra 

stateB :  "  We  have  seen  how  the  GJoapels  record  that  Jeaas 
treated  human  personality,  even  in  the  amaUest  chUd  or 
the  moat  abandoned  outcast,  aa  of  inestimable  worth.  He 
discerned  within  each  human  being  the  potentialities  of 
personality.  Beneath  the  most  forbidding  exterior  there 
were  lying  latent  powers  of  goodness  and  of  service,  only 
waiting  for  the  regenerative  influence  of  the  Spirit  to  bring 
them  to  life." '  With  a  reawakening  in  modem  times  to 
the  reality  of  personality,  there  should  also  be  the  desire 
to  develop  this  personality  to  its  highest,  and  the  corre- 
sponding sense  of  failure  and  loss  when  tbis  personality 
is  violated  in  its  possibilities  of  being  renewed  in  the  im- 
age of  God.  Thus  we  see  that  sin,  rightly  estimated,  is 
still  a  tragic  evil,  written  deep  in  the  heart  and  life  of  man. 
■Fletcher,  New  Testament  Psrcliotogy. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE  GERMAN  ATTITUDE  TO  THE  BIBLE 

THB  RBTEBBND   W.   H,  QBIFPrTH  THOUAS,  D.D. 
WYCLIPFB   COLLEGE,  TORONTO 

No  theological  question  has  been  given  greater  promi- 
nence through  the  war  than  that  of  the  Bible.  Before  the 
war  commenced  in  1914,  German  thought  and  German  teach- 
ing were  widely  accepted,  especially  in  connection  with  the 
Old  Testament.  There  is  scarcely  a  Theological  Seminary, 
a  College,  or  a  University  in  any  Englieh-speaking  conn- 
try  where  German  teaching  on  the  Old  Testament  was  not 
perhaps  the  dominant  and  almost  nniversaUy  believed  atti- 
tude. And  even  in  connection  with  the  New  Testament, 
things  were  moving  in  the  same  direction. 

Of  course  there  were  some  people  who,  long  before  tbe 
war,  did  not  follow  this  line.  They  did  not  think  that  Ger- 
man teaching  on  the  Bible  was  everything  that  was  said 
about  it.  They  were,  however,  r^arded  as  obscurantist, 
narrow,  prejudiced,  impossible,  and  guilty  of  that  most 
terrible  of  modem  Bins  —  the  sin  of  being  uuscholarly. 
And  yet  there  is  no  doubt  that  the  tendency  of  German 
thought  in  connection  with  the  Bible  for  the  last  century, 
or  thereabouts,  has  all  been  in  one  direction  —  that  of 
questioning  and  often  attacking  its  authority  as  the  Word 
of  God. 

Now  there  can  be  no  doubt  that  if  we  take  the  Bible  — 
to  use  a  modem  phrase  —  at  its  face  value,  it  claims  to  be 
a  revelation  from  God.  Without  at  this  moment  consider- 
ing whether  this  claim  is  tme,  we  may  just  take  it  as  it 
stands.  Nobody  can  read,  for  instance,  Heb.  i.  1,  2,  with- 
out seeing  that  the  Bible  does  claim  for  itself  that  it  Is  a 
revelation  from  God.  "  God  who  at  sundry  times,  and  in 
divers  manners,  spake  in  time  past  unto  the  Fathers  by 
the  Prophets "  —  there  is  a  claim  for  the  Old  Testament 
—  "  hath  in  these  last  days  spoken  to  us  by  his  Son."  And 
so  the  question  is  just  this,  "  Has  the  war  done  anything 
to  shake  our  confidence  in  this  claim?"    Or,  if  we  like  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


166  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

put  it  80,  "  Has  anything  emanated  from  Gtermany,  or 
elsewliere,  dnring  the  last  century  to  give  us  ground  for 
believing  that  the  claim  of  the  Bible  is  unwarranted?" 

Let  ns  consider  some  six  points  on  which  the  Bible 
stands  to-day,  as  it  ever  has  stood,  and  will  continue  to 
stand. 

I.      THB  UNITY  or  THI  BIBLH 

We  hardly  realize  that  the  Bible  is  not  a  book,  bat  a 
library.  It  is  interesting  to  remember  that  the  word 
"  Bible,"  though  it  is  now  applied  to  one  Book,  comes  from 
a  Greek  term  meaning  "the  books"  —  "to  biblia."  And 
when  we  see  an  edition  of  the  Bible  in  various  volumes, 
with  one  volume  to  Genesis,  another  to  Exodus,  and  right 
on  through  the  Bible,  we  begin  to  realize  that  it  is  a  library, 
not  merely  one  book.  Yet,  notwithstanding  all  these  sixty- 
six  t)ooks,  differing  in  time,  circumstances,  authorship,  and 
character,  there  is  a  unity  running  through  from  Genesis 
to  Revelation. 

It  is  said  on  good  authority  that  every  piece  of  rope  in 
the  British  Navy  has  a  red  thread  running  through  it,  so 
that  if  anyone  helps  himself  to  any  of  it,  he  and  others 
may  know  that  he  has  broken  the  eighth  commandment. 
Wherever  that  rope  is  cut,  the  red  thread  can  be  seen.  In  the 
same  way  there  is  a  red  thread  running  through  the  Bible ; 
and  wherever  we  examine  it,  we  see  indications  of  that  thread 
—  the  unity  running  from  Genesis  to  Revelation.  Now 
there  is  no  other  book  in  the  world  of  which  this  can  be 
said.  Consider  that  there  are  something  like  thirty-six 
hundred  years  between  Genesis  and  Revelation,  and  at 
least  thirty-six  different  authors;  and  yet  from  Genesis 
to  Revelation  there  is  a  oneness  running  through  all. 

It  is  a  familiar  story,  but  is  worth  repeating.  Dr.  A.  J. 
Gordon,  of  Boston,  on  one  occasion,  was  in  his  study  with 
some  of  his  chUdren,  and  he  gave  them  a  puzzle,  one  of 
those  made  of  different-sized  pieces  of  wood.  He  went  out 
and  came  back  unexpectedly,  when  to  his  surprise  he  found 
the  puzzle  completed,  and  he  said  to  the  children,  "  How 


D.qit.zeaOvGoO»^lc 


1919]  The  German  Attitude  to  the  Bible  167 

is  it  70a  did  it  BO  boou?  "  "  We  saw  the  picture  of  a  man 
on  the  back,  and  this  helped  ob  to  knov  where  the  pieces 
were  to  go."  And  bo,  aa  it  haa  often  been  pointed  out,  there 
is  a  picture  of  a  man,  the  man  Christ  Jesus,  anticipated  in 
the  Old  Testament  and  fulfilled  in  the  New,  and  this  gives 
unity  to  the  Book. 

Now  this  unity  stands  as  one  of  the  unique  features  of 
the  Bible  that  nothing  in  scholarship,  or  war,  or  anything 
else  can  destroy.  The  force  of  it  can  be  fittingly  stated 
in  the  words  of  a  great  English  Methodist  theologian,  Dr. 
W.  B.  Pope:— 

"  The  unity  of  Scripture  is  a  very  strong  credential  in 
its  favor  as  professing  to  be  from  Qod.  It  is  one  great 
vision,  and  its  interpretation  one:  beginning  and  ending 
with  the  same  Paradise,  with  thousands  of  years  of  re- 
deeming history  between.  That  the  New  Testament  as 
fulfillment  should  so  perfectly  correspond  with  the  Old 
Testament  as  prophecy  is  in  itself  the  most  wonderful 
phenomenon  in  literature:  it  is  evidence  as  near  demon- 
stration as  needs  be  of  the  intervention  of  a  Divine  Hand. 
The  Redeemer  made  manifest  in  the  later  Scripture  an- 
swers face  to  face,  and  feature  for  feature,  to  the  Form 
predicted  in  the  older  Scripture.  One  idea  runs  through 
the  whole:  the  kingdom  of  God  set  up  or  restored  in  His 
Incarnate  Son.  To  this  idea  authors  of  various  ages  and 
of  various  races  contribute  in  a  harmony  which  never 
could  be  the  result  of  accident  or  mere  coincidence.  Only 
the  Divine  Power  could  have  made  so  many  men  of  differ- 
ent lands  concert,  yet  without  concerting,  such  a  scheme 
of  literature.  If  they  had  not  asserted  their  inspiration  of 
God,  that  hypothesis  would  have  had  to  be  invented  to  ac- 
count for  the  facts  and  phenomena  of  their  writings.  But 
they  have  asserted  it:  the  claim  is  bound  up  with  every 
page  of  the  Word  they  have  left  behind  them." 

II.      THE    TTNIVBBSALtTT    Of    tHB    BIBLB 

The  Bible  was  written  by  Jews,  who  were  in  many  re- 
spects one  of  the  most  narrow  of  peoples.  It  was  written  in 
the  East,  and  the  East  is  as  different  from  the  West  as 
any  two  parts  of  the  human  race  can  be.  And  yet  it  is 
equally  applicable  to  us  in  the  West  to-day.  It  is  for  all; 
it  is  suited  to  every  place. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lC 


168  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

We  are  told  by  those  who  know,  that  one  of  the  most 
difficult  things  in  the  world  is  to  translate  from  one  lan- 
guage to  another.  A  little  while  ago  I  found  a  delightful 
French  poem  written  by  a  Belgian  French  poet;  and,  on 
reproducing  it  in  an  article,  I  suggested  to  some  English 
writers  that  they  should  translate  it.  They  did,  but  they 
almost  entirely  lost  the  flavor,  the  aroma  of  that  exquisite 
little  poem.  The  same  is  true  of  renderings  from  English 
into  other  languages.  It  would  be  interesting  to  see  what 
the  Chinese  would  make  of  one  of  Shakespeare's  plays,  or 
what  they  would  do  with  "  To  be,  or  not  to  be  "  or  some 
other  well-known  passage.  How  much  of  Shakespeare 
woald  be  left? 

And  yet  the  Bible  is  the  most  marvelous  Book  in  the 
world  in  this  respect,  that  it  loses  least  of  any  book  in 
translation.  The  Bible  Societies  have  well  over  six  hun- 
dred translations,  either  into  languages  or  dialects;  and, 
notwithstanding  all  these  in  different  parts  of  the  earth, 
the  essential  teaching  of  the  Bible  is  preserved  intact  In 
all  the  renderings  from  the  Hebrew  and  Oreek  into  other 
languages  or  dialects.  This  is  the  universality  of  the 
Bible.  Here  again  we  can  only  account  for  it  by  the  fact 
that  it  is  Buj>ematural,  that  it  comes  from  God. 

III.      THB  BEAUTY  Of  THB  BIBLB 

There  are  many  things  about  the  Bible  that  prove  its 
reality.  For  our  present  purpose,  let  us  take  two.  Its 
reality  is  seen  in  the  predictions  of  the  Old  Testament. 
Now,  of  course,  there  are  a  good  many  more  things  in 
prophecy  than  prediction,  but  we  must  never  forget  that 
the  primary  idea  of  prophecy  in  the  Old  Testament  is 
foretelling  the  future.  Among  other  things,  we  notice  in 
Amos  V.  27  a  prediction  that  the  northern  kingdom  of 
Israel  should  go  into  captivity.  When  those  words  were 
uttered  by  the  prophet,  there  was  not  a  hint  of  trouble, 
everything  was  prosperous,  and  Jeroboam  II,  was  on  the 
throne,  perhaps  the  greatest  and  most  powerful  king  of 
Israel.     And  yet  with  everything  bright  and  materially 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  German  Attitude  to  the  Bible  169 

eatisfactory,  the  prophet  said,  "  You  are  going  to  be  taken 
into  captivity  beyond  Damascos  "j  and  we  know  that  that 
took  place.    Thia  is  a  case  of  absolnte  prediction. 

Take  another  case.  In  Isa.  xzxix.  6,  7,  the  prophet 
Isaiah  went  to  Hezekiah,  and  when  he  foond  that  the  king 
had  shown  his  treasnres  to  the  Babylonians,  he  said, 
"Your  people  shall  be  taken  into  captivity  to  Babylon." 
Kow  Babylon  at  that  time,  by  comparison  with  Assyria, 
had  no  power;  and  yet  it  ia  not  to  Assyria,  but  to  Baby- 
lon, that  Isaiah  predicts  the  captivity;  and  we  know  it 
took  place  a  hundred  and  fifty  years  after  Isaiah's  time. 
I  have  been  interested  to  see  what  commentators  have 
made  of  these  worde,  because  here  is  a  case  of  prediction ; 
and  one  of  the  best  known  and  most  important  of  modem 
commentators,  when  he  tried  to  explain  it,  said  it  was  a 
statement  of  "  poetic  truth  "  —  whatever  that  means. 

For  the  reality  of  the  New  Testament,  only  one  point 
can  now  be  mentioned  —  the  portrait  of  Jesns  Christ.  It 
is  worth  recalling  that  the  great  literary  geniuses  of  the 
ages  have  never  attempted  to  depict  a  perfect  character. 
We  do  not  find  a  perfect  character  attempted  in  any  of 
the  masterpieces  from  Homer  downwards.  Yet  four  men, 
called  Matthew,  Mark,  Luke,  and  John,  give  us  the  record 
of  a  perfect  character.  They  were  not  literary  geniuses  at 
all,  and  one  or  two  of  them  were  quite  ordinary  men ;  but, 
nevertheless,  for  nearly  two  thousand  years  we  Iiave  had 
a  perfect  character  depicted  by  them,  which  has  been  the 
admiration  of  the  centuries. 

How  are  we  to  account  for  it?  It  "  takes  a  Jesns  to  in- 
vent a  Jesus,"  as  someone  has  said ;  and  if  these  ordinary 
men  invented  the  character  of  Jesus,  then  (to  use  a  fa- 
miliar argument)  we  are  in  the  presence  of  a  miracle  far 
greater  than  any  our  Lord  ever  wrought. 

IV.      THE  TITAUTT  OP  THE  BIBLB 

In  Heb.  iv.  12'we  read  that  the  Word  of  God  is  living, 
and  in  1  Peter  i.  23  that  it  is  a  living  seed.  This  is  because 
it  comes  from  the  living  Ood,  and  one  of  the  most  striking 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


170  BibUotheca  Sacra  [April, 

things  about  the  Bible  is  the  way  in  which  it  providee  for 
the  living  needs  of  living  people  to-day.  In  some  respects 
this  is  the  most  satisfying  evidence  of  Christianity  —  the 
way  in  which  the  Bible,  as  a  living  Book,  provides  for  the 
needs  of  people  who  are  alive. 

Some  of  the  things  told  by  workers  during  the  war  read 
almost  like  chapters  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  There 
have  been  hundreds  of  incidents  during  the  last  four  years 
—  testimonies  to  the  Bible  in  connection  with  human  needs, 
and  without  doabt  we  shall  find  in  them  a  fresh  and  force- 
ful proof  of  the  truth  of  Christianity. 

v.      THE  SINGDLABITT  OF  THB  BIBUI 

By  the  singularity  of  the  Bible  is  meant  its  claim  to  be 
the  only,  the  exclusive  way  of  salvation. 

For  the  first  two  or  three  hundred  years  Christianity 
suffered  persecution  at  the  hands  of  the  Roman  Empire. 
This  was  because  it  claimed  to  dispossess  every  other  re- 
ligions system,  and  to  be  the  only  religion  in  the  world. 
If  the  Christian  people  had  gone  to  the  Emperor,  and  oth- 
ers in  authority,  and  said,  "This  is  a  new  religion;  we 
want  yoQ  to  allow  it  to  come  with  the  others  and  be  put 
in  your  Pantheon,"  they  would  have  been  ready  to  allow 
Christianity  to  appear  as  one  of  the  number.  But  that  was 
not  the  way  of  the  Gospel.  It  said,  in  effect,  "  No,  this  is 
the  only  religion.  The  others  are  not  religions."  Perscr 
cation  then  came  upon  Christianity,  because  it  was  intol- 
erant—  in  the  right  sense  of  the  word,  the  only  way  in 
which  anyone  has  a  right  to  be  intolerant  with  the  intol- 
erance of  truth. 

80  it  is  now  with  regard  to  missionary  propaganda. 
When  we  go  to  the  foreign  field,  we  claim  that  Chris- 
tianity will  do  for  mankind  what  no  other  religion  can  do. 
Tet  there  are  people  who  say  that  one  religion  is  as  good 
as  another,  especially  to  those  who  are  brought  up  in  it. 
But  why  do  they  say  this  about  religion  and  not  about 
anything  else?  Is  it  not  right  for  us  to  give  people  the 
very  best  that  we  have?    What  about  medical  science? 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  German  Attitude  to  the  Bible  171 

Are  we  content  to  accept  the  science  of  {say)  a  hundred 
years  ago,  if  we  find  to-day  that  science  is  better?  Are 
we  never  to  introdnce  new  lines  of  sanitation  in  heathen 
lands,  although  we  have  something  far  better  and  more 
likely  to  save  life  than  they  have  or  are  likely  to  have? 
Are  we  not  to  give  them  the  very  best  in  any  other  walk 
of  life? 

And  therefore,  with  regard  to  Christianity,  we  maintain 
that  it  is  the  best  of  all  religions.  We  do  not  for  a  mo- 
ment despise,  so  far  as  they  are  true,  any  other  systems  of 
religion ;  but  we  say  that  every  other  system  is  an  aspira- 
tion of  man  after  Qod,  and  Christianity  is  a  revelation  of 
Ood  to  man.  The  others  start  with  man  and  try  to  get  to 
God.  Christianity  starts  from  Qod  and  comes  ■  down  to 
man. 

VI.      THB  FINALITY  OF  THE  BIBLE 

The  Bible  has  now  been  before  the  world  for  nearly  two 
thousand  years  in  its  complete  form,  and  yet  it  has  said 
the  last  word  on  some  of  the  greatest  things  in  life.  We  find 
in  the  Bible  the  last  word  about  salvation  from  sin,  the 
last  word  about  holiness,  the  last  word  about  the  future 
life.  And,  as  others  have  often  pointed  out,  while  we  out- 
grow the  teaching  of  other  men,  we  never  outgrow  the 
teaching  of  Jesus  Christ  and  His  Apostles. 

Not  only  so,  we  have  had  great  systems  of  philosophy 
and  morality  during  the  last  thousand  or  fifteen  hundred 
years,  great  theories,  great  books,  and  great  ideas;  but 
there  is  not  a  single  new  moral  fact,  not  a  single  new  eth- 
ical idea,  in  any  one  of  these  great  systems  that  we  can- 
not find  in  this  Book.  How  is  it  that,  with  all  the  great 
teachers  of  these  centuries,  nothing  new  has  been  pro- 
pounded beyond  what  is  found  in  this  Book  ? 

Now  these  are  the  six  things:  the  Unity,  the  Univer- 
sality, the  Reality,  the  Vitality,  the  Singularity,  and  the 
Finality  of  the  Bible.  And  the  supreme  point  is  this:  the 
real  question  in  connection  with  the  Bible  is  not  literary 
or  even  historical;  it  is  spiritual. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


172  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

The  fondamental  issue  is  whether  the  Bible  la  a  snp<er- 
oatnral  Book.  The  tendencf  in  Qerman;  for  the  laat  hun- 
dred years  has  been  to  deny  this.  We  are  told  again  and 
again  that  we  are  to  read  the  Bible  like  any  other  book. 
This  sounds  attractive,  bnt  it  may  be  questioned  whether 
it  is  correct.  A  truer  way  to  put  it  is,  that  we  should  read 
the  Bible  like  any  other  book  making  the  same  claim.  The 
Bible  claims  to  be  from  Qod.  Let  us  read  it  like  any  other 
book  tliat  makes  the  same  claim,  and  then  see  what  the 
result  will  be.  Or,  if  we  prefer  to  state  the  case  in  this 
way,  let  us  first  read  it  like  any  other  book,  and  then  read 
it  as  unlike  every  other  book ;  and  when  we  do  both,  there 
will  be  no  doubt  in  our  minds  that  the  Bible  makes  a 
claim  to  be  supernatural. 

The  fact  is,  and  this  is  the  point  to  consider,  there  is 
something  in  the  Bible  that  we  cannot  analyze  by  ordinary 
human  methods.  Just  as  we  cannot  analyze  life,  no  there  is 
that  in  the  Bible  which  we  cannot  analyze.  We  can  per- 
haps analyze  it  into  its  historical  and  its  literary  and  other 
parts,  bnt  there  is  still  something  we  cannot  analyze,  and 
that  is  the  supernatural  element.  This  is  beyond  anything 
we  hare  in  the  finest  critical  school. 

In  view  of  aU  that  we  know  now,  it  is  vital  and  import- 
ant to  observe  that  the  German  intellect  is  not  the  superior 
thing  which  we  were  taught  before  the  war.  All  the  things 
that  are  important  in  ordinary  life  have  been  invented  out- 
side of  Oermaay.  Steamships,  railroads,  the  telegraph, 
electricity,  the  telephone,  wireless  telegraph,  and  even  the 
aeroplane  and  the  submarine  —  not  one  of  these  was  in- 
vented in  Germany.  In  a  very  interesting  pamphlet  "  The 
History  of  the  Submarine,"  it  says  that  for  three  hundred 
years  att^npts  were  made  to  perfect  what  we  now  know 
as  the  submarine.  The  remarkable  thing  is  that  we  can- 
not trace  anything  worthy  of  the  name  among  the  Ger- 
mans in  connection  with  this  invention.  Not  only  so,  but 
when  they  used  a  model  of  a  submarine  a  few  years  ago, 
they  only  adopted  someone  dse^s,  and  he  was  a  Spaniard, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Qtrman  Attitude  to  the  Bible  173 

a  Spanish  architect  who  had  a  French  model.  All  the  Ger- 
man U-boats  have  been  built  on  a  French  model. 

This  means  that  the  German  intellect  is  not  creative, 
but  adaptive.  Now  if  this  is  the  case  in  regard  to  ordinary 
everyday  life,  why  should  we  think  the  German  intellect 
is  superior  in  regard  to  the  Bible?  The  fact  is  the  German 
intellect  lacks  insight  —  the  very  thing  required  for  a 
proper  knowledge  of  the  Bible,  See  how  the  German  in- 
tellect lacked  insight  in  regard  to  the  war  —  first  of  all, 
England  would  not  fi^t;  secondly,  France  could  be  de- 
feated at  once,  and  then  they  coold  turn  to  Russia ;  thirdly, 
America  would  not  come  in;  fourthly,  America  could  be 
easily  involved  with  Mexico  and  Japan.  If  this  is  the  case 
in  regard  to  politics,  a  thousandfold  more  is  it  the  case  in 
regard  to  the  Bible,  which  needs  spiritual  insight  as  well 
as  intellectual  acumen.  One  of  our  British  jurists,  Sir 
Frederick  Pollock,  writing  on  the  events  of  the  last  four 
years,  uttered  some  words  which  are  worthy  of  Iwing  re- 
membered :  "  The  Germans  will  go  down  in  history  as  the 
people  who  foresaw  everything  except  that  which  actually 
happened."  If,  therefore,  these  things  are  true  in  regard ' 
to  earthly  matters,  we  have  no  right  to  believe  that  things 
are  otherwise  in  regard  to  that  which  is  the  most  import- 
ant of  all  —  the  Bible.  There  is  nothing  more  impressive 
daring  the  four  years  of  the  war  than  the  German  lack  of 
insight  into  character. 

We  are  not  afraid  of  scholarship.  The  only  thing  we 
have  a  right  to  be  afraid  of  is  that  which  denies  Ood  and 
the  supernatural.  There  are  three  kinds  of  criticism,  and 
when  we  get  the  three  together  there  is  no  need  to  be  afraid. 
There  is  what  is  called  the  Lower  Criticism,  the  criticism 
of  the  text,  Hebrew  and  Greek.  Then  comes  the  Higher 
Criticism,  the  knowledge  of  history  and  literature,  and 
date  and  place,  circumstance  and  character,  and  so  on. 
And  there  is  what  has  been  sometimes  called  the  Highest 
Oiticism,  the  criticism  su^^;ested  by  Isa.  Ixvi.  2,  "  To  this 
man  wiU  I  look,  even  to  him  that  is  poor  and  of  a  contrite 
spirit,  and  trembleth  at  my  word."    When  we  get  these 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


174  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

together,  we  can  "  criticize  "  the  Bible  as  much  as  we  like, 
becaose,  as  we  go  on  criticizing,  we  find  that  will  happen 
which  is  written  in  Heb.  iv.  13.  In  the  Greek  of  that  pas- 
sage it  tells  U8  the  Bible  is  the  "  critic  "  o(  us.  It  is  the 
only  place  in  the  Bible  where  the  word  is  used.  And  when 
the  Bible  criticizes  us,  we  begin  to  understand  the  Bible 
aa  never  before,  and  perhaps  we  shall  be  led  to  criticize 
it  less. 

It  is  therefore  necessary  to  put  in  a  plea  for  the  great- 
est possible  independence  in  connection  with  Bible  study. 
Up  to  the  time  of  the  war,  all  the  ideas  of  critical  scholars 
came  from  Germany,  some  'adopted  and  others  adapted. 
Let  ns  hope  that  day  is  past.  It  ought  to  be.  At  any  rate, 
younger  men  and  women,  as  they  study  these  subjects, 
should  determine  to  be  independent,  look  at  these  things 
(or  themselves,  and  see  that  they  face  all  the  facts  and 
factors  and  draw  their  conclusions  only  when  everything 
has  been  considered.  There  need  be  no  doubt  whatever  as 
to  the  result,  if  a  man  will  look  at  all  the  elements  of  the 
situation  and  not  simply  those  that  he  may  have  had  set 
before  him  in  a  very  partial  way. 

A  secular  newspaper  well  said  a  little  while  ago :  "  For 
forty  years  the  Germans  have  been  reading  philosophy, 
and  have  forgotten  to  read  the  Bible.  That  is  a  great 
blunder  —  the  greatest  blunder  a  nation  ever  made."  There 
are  many  people  who  know  very  much  about  the  Bible, 
but  do  not  know  the  Bible  itself.  There  are  students  who 
could  sit  for  an  examination  and  tell  all  about  the  literary 
questions  connected  with  the  Fourth  Gh>spel,  the  external 
and  the  internal  evidences  for  believing  that  it  came  from 
the  Apostle  John,  but  they  could  not  do  the  same  for  the 
contents  of  the  Gospel.  We  know  a  great  deal  about  the 
Bible.  Let  us  see  that  we  know  more  of  the  Bible  itsdf. 
Let  us  think  our  way  through  a  book,  and  be  able  to  know 
exactly  where  this  is  or  where  that  is.  Let  us  know  what 
Mark  contains,  how  it  differs  from  Matthew,  know  what 
John  contains,  know  what  Acts  contains,  know  what  Bo- 
mans  contains.    Let.us  not  only  have  a  few  pet  texts,  like 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


[April,       The  German  Attitude  to  the  Bible  175 

John  iiL  16,  or  John  v.  24,  or  John  zir.  1,  but  let  us  also 
master  John  for  oorseLves.  Let  as  master  Bomana,  with 
its  keyword  "righteousneas";  and  so  with  regard  to  aU 
the  other  books  in  one  way  or  another. 

If  we  get  to  know  what  the  books  contain,  then  we  ahaU 
have  one  of  the  greatest  safeguards  againat  erroneona  crit- 
icism and  one  of  the  greatest  helps  towards  true  criticism. 
The  trouble  is  that,  when  we  do  not  fill  our  minds  with  the 
Bible,  we  are  liable  to  have  them  filled  with  other  things. 
As  someone  said  about  the  Oermana  in  connection  with 
things  spiritual :  "  The  criticism  of  the  Gospels  rendered 
the  Cterman  mind  incapable  of  the  faith,  and  into  the 
vacuum  of  a  rejected  Christianity  there  rushed  this  resur- 
gence of  the  national  spirit." 

We  muat  therefore  atudy  the  Bible,  master  its  contents, 
believe  it,  obey  it;  and  then  we  shall  come  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  "  Thy  word  is  true  from  the  b^^ning  " ;  "  Thy 
word  is  very  pure;  therefore  thy  servant  loveth  it." 


Vol.  ixxvr.    No.  302.    3 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


PRIEST  —  PRIESTHOOD 

THB   REVEREND  WILLIAM    H.    BATES,   D.D. 
WASHINGTON,  D.  C. — QaHKLKTj  COLO. 

The  dictionary  definition  of  priest  is  "  one  who  officiates 
at  the  altar,  or  who  performs  the  rites  of  sacrifice;  one 
who  acte  as  mediator  between  man  and  the  divinity  or 
the  gods  in  any  form  of  religion."  Scripture  says  that 
"  every  high  priest  talien  from  among  men,  is  ordained  for 
men  in  things  pertaining  to  God,  that  he  may  offer  both 
gifts  and  sacrifices  for  sins"  (Heb.  v.  1).  The  same  would 
be  true  of  the  lesser  priests. 

PBIESTHOOD    DNIVBRSAL 

Previous  to  the  Mosaic  economy,  so  far  as  the  history 
appears  in  Scripture,  there  was  no  priestly  "  caste."  ^  The 
patriarchs — Noah,  Abraham,  Jethro,  etc. —  offered  their 
own  sacrifices.  The  fathers  were  priests  of  their  own  fam- 
Uies.    Priesthood  was  universal. 

This  condition  might  have  continued,  for  Qod  bade 
Moses  tell  the  children  of  Israel :  "  Now  therefore,  if  ye 
will  obey  my  voice  indeed,  and  keep  my  covenant,  ...  ye 
shall  be  unto  me  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  an  holy  nation  " 
(Bz.  six.  5,  6).  AH  should  have  equal  access  to  Ood,  each 
one  being  his  own  priest. 

PRIESTHOOD    LIMITED 

What  was  thus  offered  conditionally,  was ,  alas,  re- 
scinded, because  the  covenant  they  entered  into  (Ex.  xix. 
8;  Deut.  v.  2)  with  Gtod  they  broke;  they  disobeyed.  Some 
other  plan  must  be  devised. 

'  So  tai  as  prl«BU7  caete  may  be  found  outside,  In  Babylonia, 
Egypt,  or  elsewhere,  it  was  manlteatl;  a  usurpation;  for,  from 
the  ^t  that  Cain  and  Abel  offered  their  own  sacrifices — (pre- 
Bumably  Adam,  too.  since  It  must  bave  been  from  him  that  his 
sons  received  their  teaching) — It  Is  plain  that  the  divine  Intent 
was  that  priesthood  should  be  Individualistic  and  not  the  prerog- 
ative of  only  a  sacerdotal  class  ^part  from  other  mm. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Priest  —  Prieathood  177 

On  account  of  Israel's  sad  failnre,  God  instituted  the 
Aaronic  or  Levitical  priesthood,  and  approach  to  Him 
must  henceforth  be  through  this  mediating  class.  Bat  as 
we  now  know,  that  scheme  was  provisional,  temporary,  and 
its  rites  were  typical.  In  the  course  of  time  the  primal 
condition  was  to  be  restored,  and  a  universal  priestly  priv- 
ilege and  service  be  again  the  boon  of  all  mankind. 

PBIBSTHOOn   UNIVBBSAI.  AQAIH 

In  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  (chaps.  v.-x.)  Christ  is 
shown  to  have  fulfilled  and  accomplished  all  that  was  typ- 
ically and  practically  intended  in  the  old-time  priesthood, 
both  that  of  Aaron  and  Melchizedek  as  well.  He  assumed 
both  lines  —  that  inside  the  Levitical  cult  and  that  out- 
side —  into  his  own  priestly  person,  becoming  thus  the  end 
of  both,  and  thereby  opening  forevermore  the  way  of  access 
to  aU  who  would  come  unto  Qod  by  him. 

There  is  therefore  no  more  need  or  place  for  any  human 
or  priestly  "  class "  to  mediate  between  man  and  Gh>d. 
Every  believer  in  Christ  now  has  "  an  high  priest  over  the 
house  of  God,"  and  he  can  himself  "  draw  near  with  a 
true  heart  in  full  assurance  of  faith  "  (Heb.  z.  21,  22).  Ac- 
cordingly St.  Peter  says:  "Ye  also  as  lively  stones,  are 
built  up  a  spiritual  house,  an  holy  priesthood  to  off^  up 
spiritual  sacrifices.  ...  Ye  are  a  chosen  generation,  a  royal 
priesthood,  an  holy  nation"  (1  Pet.  ii.  5-9). 

All  Christians,  therefore,  are  priests  to  God  now;  and 
to  interject  the  offices  of  any  earthly  ofBcial  between  a 
soul  and  its  Maker  is  an  awful  sacrilege.  Again  priest- 
hood is  universal. 

iJo  "  PRIISTS  "  IN  THB  NEW   TESTAMENT  CHUECH 

It  is  most  noteworthy  that  in  the  founding  and  founda- 
tion of  the  Christian  church,  as  set  forth  in  the  New  Tes- 
tament, no  human  minister  of  religion  is  ever  called  a 
priest 

There  were  apostles,  prophets,  evangelists,  teachers  (Eph. 
iv.  11),  elders  (Acts  xiv.  23;  1  Tim.  v.  17;  1  Pet.  v.  1), 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


178  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

overseera  or  bishops,  deacons  (1  Tim.  iii.  1,  10;  Phil.  i.  1), 
but  priests  never,  never! 

To  import  that  term  into  the  church,  as  a  class  dietinc- 
tioD,  is  therefore  entirely  unscriptural  and  unwarrantable, 
and  to  credit  or  invest  any  man,  or  set  of  men,  with  a 
priestly  or  sacerdotal  function,  is  to  dishonor  the  great 
High  Priest  of  our  profession,  and  rob  each  priest-believer 
of  his  spiritual  birthright. 

THB  TRUE   OBIQIN   OF  THB  ROUAN  CATHOLIC  PBIBSTHOOD 

It  may  be  asked,  then.  Where  does  the  Boman  Catholic 
Church  get  ita  Priesthood  ?  This  question  may  be  answered 
both  negatively  and  positively. 

Neoativblt.  That  it  has  no  Scripture  warrant  or  au- 
thority has  just  been  made  to  plainly  appear.  To  be  sure, 
Boman  Catholics  claim  Bible  authority  for  it;  but  their 
claim  is  a  foisted  fake  pure  and  simple,  as  will  be  at  once 
dearly  shown. 

At  the  family  worship  in  the  home  of  the  writer,  both 
the  Protestant  and  Catholic  Bibles  are  used.  One  morning 
James  v.  14  was  read:  "  Is  any  sick  among  you?  let  him 
call  for  the  elders  of  the  church,  and  let  them  pray  avee 
him,"  etc.  But  the  Catholic  version  gives  it  thus:  "  Is  any 
sick  among  you?  Let  him  bring  in  the  priests  of  the 
church,  and  let  them  pray  over  him,"  etc.  The  differoice 
between  these  two  renderings  led  to  questionings  which 
resulted  in  what  has  been  presented  thus  far  in  this  disqui- 
sition and  in  what  Is  further  to  be  presented. 

The  appar^it  Biblical  authority  which  the  Boman  Catholic 
English  (Douay)  version  gives  for  "priest"  is  unwarrant- 
ably brought  in  by  a  mistranslation. 

In  the  New  Testament  the  Greek  word  wptv^vrepovt 
presbuteroa,  elder,  occurs,  substantively,  62  times.  Origi- 
nally it  denoted  seniority  in  age,  but  afterward  it  became 
a  term  of  rank  or  office,  and  now,  in  church  usage,  it  is 
popularly  so  understood.    Often  "  elders  "  are  young  men. 

In  the  Latin  Vnlgate — the  authoritative  Bible  of  the 
Boman  Catholic  Church  —  the  word  is  simply  transferred 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Priest  —  Priesthood  179 

from  the  Qreek^  presbuteroa,  and  is  never  translated  by 
"  sacerdw,"  the  Latin  word  for  priest. 

In  the  Italian  version  it  is  alvays  translated  by  anziano, 
the  officer-word,  and  never  by  "  eacerdote/'  the  Italian 
word  for  priest. 

In  the  Spanish  version  it  is  presbiteroa,  and  never  "  sa- 
cerdote." 

In  the  French  version  it  is  imciens  or  pasteur,  and  never 
**  sacriflcateur  "  or  "  pretre." 

In  the  German  version  it  is  aeltesten,  never  "  priester." 

In  the  Protestant  English  version  it  is  always  trans- 
lated, as  it  should  be,  elder,  and  never  "  priest." 

In  the  Romish  English  version,  always,  except  six  times, 
it  is  translated  "ancient"  (their  word  for  dder),  but  in 
these  sextuple  instances,  where  for  no  other  reason  than 
to  make  an  ecclesiastical  and  sectarian  point  for  Roman- 
ism, it  is  rendered  priest ! 

Although  presbuteroa  had  occurred  29  times  up  to  Acts 
xiv.  23,  not  until  then  do  Romanists  translate  it  priest: 
"Ordained  to  them  priests  in  every  church,"  instead  of 
"elders  in  every  church,"  as  it  should  be.  The  next  in- 
stance is  Acts  XV.  2,  "  apostles  and  priests,"  instead  of 
"  apostles  and  elders "  as  the  Greek  requires ;  yet  two 
verses  farther  on  {ver.  4)  it  is  not  translated  "priest," 
but  "  ancient."  The  other  flagrant  instances  of  like  mis- 
translation are  1  Timothy  v.  17,  19;  Titus  i.  5;  and  James 
V.  14.  And  such  is  Roman  Catholic  Biblical  authority  for 
"Priest"! 

Says  Hastings's  Bible  Dictionary: — 

"'Priest'  (Gr.  hiereua)  is  employed  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment to  denote  anyone  whose  function  is  to  offer  a  relig- 
ious sacrifice.  .  ,  ,  The  New  Testament  never  describes  the 
Chriatian  mintatry  as  a  priesthood,  or  the  individual  min- 
ister as  a  priest,  except  in  the  general  sense  in  which  these 
terms  are  applied  to  all  believers.  .  .  .  The  two  terms  '  pres- 
byter' (presbyteroa)  and  'priest'  (hiereua)  which  came 
to  be  confounded  by  and  by,  were  at  first  kept  absolutely 
apart"  (pp.  754,  755,  one  vol.  ed.). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


180  Bibliotheca  8acra  [April, 

The  attempt  to  connect  the  Romish  priesthood  with  the 
Jewish  priesthood,  and  so  give  It  semblance  of  Scripture 
warrant,  is  entirely  gratuitous;  for,  as  every  one  knows 
or  ought  to  fenow,  the  Jewish  priesthood  —  typical  —  was 
fulfilled  and  came  to  an  end  in  Christ.  There  is  therefore 
no  sacerdotal  or  priestly  office  in  the  church. 

FosiTiTBLT.  Says  J.  Gamier  in  the  second  volume  of 
his  "  The  True  and  the  False  Christ " : — 

"  The  priesthood  of  Rome  claims  to  be  the  successors  of 
the  apostled,  but  they  have  been  the  chief  opposers  of  the 
tmtb  tanght  by  the  apostles,  and  the  chief  agents  in  resus- 
citating the  idolatry  which  Christ  came  to  destroy.  On  the 
other  hand,  they  have  a  true  and  just  claim  to  be  the  sue- 
cegsors  of  the  pagan  priesthood.  Pop  not  only  are  the  title 
and  office  of  Pontifex-Maximus,  and  orders,  offices,  sacer- 
dotal dresses,  symbols,  doctrines,  soi-ceries  and  idolatries 
of  Rome  directly  derived  from  the  priegthood  of  paganism, 
but  they  are  the  rightful  and  direct  successors  of  the  su- 
preme pontiffs  and  priesthood  of  ancient  Babylon  and  pa- 
gan Rome." 

Says  the  Roman  Catholic  Cardinal  Newman  in  his  booh, 
"An  Essay  on  the  Development  of  Christian  Doctrine  " : — 

"  We  are  told  in  various  ways  by  Eusebius,  that  Constan- 
tine,  in  order  to  recommend  the  new  religion  to  the  heathen, 
transferred  into  it  the  outward  ornaments  to  which  they 
had  been  accustomed  in  their  own.  It  Is  not  necessary  to 
go  into  a  subject  which  the  diligence  of  Protestant  writers 
has  made  familiar  to  most  of  us.  The  use  of  temples,  and 
these  dedicated  to  particular  saints,  and  ornamented  on 
occasions  with  branches  of  trees;  incense,  lamps  and  can- 
dles ;  votive  offerings  on  recovery  from  illness ;  holy  water, 
asylums;  holidays  and  seasons,  use  of  calendars,  proces- 
sions, blessings  on  the  field;  sacerdotal  vestments,  the  ton- 
sure, the  ring  in  marriage,  turning  to  the  east,  images  at 
a  later  date,  perhaps  the  ecclesiastical  chant  and  the  Ky- 
rie  elieson,  are  all  of  pagan  origin."  (The  italics  in  botii 
these  quotations  are  ours.) 

Says  Pember,  in  his  "  Earth's  Earliest  Ages,"  "  Popery 
is  nothing  but  Paganism  under  a  changed  name,  and  cov- 
ered with  a  gauzy  veil  of  Christianity"  (p.  368). 

Space  does  not  permit  the  overwhelming  adduction  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pries*  —  Priesthood  181 

proof  of  the  allegations  in  the  forgoing.  It  is  said  that 
the  ancient  pagan  augurs  could  not  meet  on  the  streets  of 
Borne  without  laughing  each  other  in  the  face,  such  arrant 
hypocrites  and  frauds  did  the;  knov  themselves  to  be. 
Well  may  priests  of  Bome  do  the  same  thing. 

Let  it  be  nnderstood,  then,  that  the  Roman  Catholic 
priesthood  is  not  of  Christian  origin,  but  is  of  pagan  deri- 
vation. Any  hierarchical  claim,  therefore,  whose  validity 
is  assumed  or  presumed  to  rest  on  any  scriptural  warrant 
or  authority,  is  utterly  fraudulent  and  false.  There  is 
nothing  in  it. 

When  the  Church  in  England  under  Henry  VIII.  (1533) 
separated  from  Some  and  set  up  for  itself,  it  was  as  much 
Soman  Catholic  in  doctrine  as  it  had  been  before,  and  it 
carried  with  it  the  unscriptural  priestly  cult.  In  the  re- 
tonns  that  followed,  it  is  to  be  regretted  that  the  "  priest " 
order  was  not  reformed  out.  Its  retention  by  the  Protest- 
ant Episcopal  Church  in  this  country  is  one  of  the  ele- 
ments that  is  likely  to  abort  all  its  attempts  at  union  with 
other  denominations. 

PaiBST-BBI.IBTER   TRUTHS   RBASSBRTHiD 

It  is  high  time  that  these  Scriptural  truths  were  iter- 
ated and  reiterated,  when  an  ecclesiastical  hierarchy 
{hiereua,  priest;  arcke,  rule),  claiming  rightful  dominance 
over  all  mankind,  is,  with  blatant  and  insolent  intrusion, 
thrusting  itself  so  unblushingly  into  the  face  and  eyes  of 
American  Christendom,  and  even  in  Washington,  the  cap- 
ital of  this  great  nation,  is  virtually  compelling  oflflcial- 
dom,  in  some  ways,  from  the  President  down,  to  yield  to 
its  warrantless  priestly  pretensions. 

The  truth  of  the  common  priesthood  of  all  believers, 
now  so  much  obscured,  is  no  new  notion.  It  was  set  forth 
by  the  earliest  Church  writers,  like  Justin  Martyr  (105- 
165),  Irenteus  (115-190),  Tertullian  (160-240),  and  others. 
More  yet,  the  Soman  pontiff.  Pope  Leo  I.  (440-461),  called 
"  Leo  the  Great,"  dwelt  on  the  same  truth. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


182  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

THE   IBUTB    PEBVBBXBD 

But  at  an  early  date,  in  imitation  of  Old  Testament  usage, 
there  was  a  beginning  of  calling  the  clergy  "  priests,"  for 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  there  is  not  a  particle  of  Scripture 
authority.  In  the  third  century  the  offering  of  the  Eucha- 
rist, which  18  a  thank  offering  —  such  was  the  growth  of 
the  priestly  idea  —  began  to  be  regarded  as  made  in  behalf 
of  the  people  instead  of  by  the  people. 

The  countries  about  the  Mediterranean  were  distributed 
for  the  purposes  of  ecclesiastical  administration,  into  five 
patriarchates,  named  from  their  civic  centers :  Alex- 
andria, Antioch,  Constantinople,  Jerusalem,  and  Rome. 
These  were  at  first  of  equal '  and  coordinate  standing, 
neither  one  claiming  any  supremacy  over  the  other.  But 
about  the  middle  of  the  fifth  century,  Leo  I.,  mainly  for 
political  reasons,  —  such  was  the  coalition  between  popes 
and  emperors,  —  began  to  advance  the  ambitious  and  usurp- 
ing idea  of  the  primacy  of  Rome.  This  idea  was  pushed 
until  in  the  eleventh  century  (1054)  there  resulted  the 
Oreat  Schism,  or  separation  of  Christendom  into  two 
parts:  the  Roman  or  Western  Church,  and  Ae  GreA  or 
Eastern  Church.  Of  course  the  great  body  from  which 
this  cutting-off  was  made  was  no  less  church,  qualitatively, 
than  it  was  before,  nor  was  that  which  by  its  excising  act 
became  the  Roman  Church  any  more  church,  either  quali- 
tatively or  quantitatively,  than  it  had  been  hitherto.  It 
may  therefore  be  said,  in  passing,  that  there  was  no  such 
thing  as  a  distinctive  Roman  Catholic  Church  until  after 
this  wicked  schismatic  eleventh-century  event. 

Involved  in  this  deplorable  contention  was  the  upspring- 
ing  and  growth  of  the  hierarchy  (pnest  rule),  which  be- 
came a  most  powerful  adjuvant  to  pontifical  pretensions 
and  projects.  With  equal  step,  the  concept  of  the  Eucha- 
rist as  a  thank  offering  gave  place  to  that  of  a  sacrifice, 

'White,  In  his  BIshteen  Christian  Centuries  (chapter  on  the  Gth 
c«ntur7).  Bars:  "The  Roman  Bishop  had  not  yet  asserted  his 
supremacy  over  the  Church.  Each  prelate  was  sovereign  Pontiff 
of  his  own  see,  and  bis  doctrines  for  a  long  time  regulated  the 
doctrines  of  bis  flock"  (p.  116). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Prieat  —  Priesthood  183 

for  which  a  priestly  fonction  waB  indispensable.  And,  as 
"  The  Catholic  Encyclopedia  "  says ;  "  The  essential  cor- 
relative of  priesthood  is  sacrifice"  (vol.  zii.  p.  400).  The 
commoD  priesthood  of  believers  was  displaced  by  the  priest- 
hood of  ao  official  caste.  When  in  the  thirteenth  century 
the  doctrine  of  Transnbstantiation  (that  is,  changing  the 
bread  and  wine  of  the  Eucharist  into  the  veritable  body 
and  blood  of  Christ!)  was  fixed,  the  sacrificial  cliarac- 
ter  of  the  elements,  or  mass,  was  determined  by  Thomas 
Aquinas  (1227-74),  and  Albert  the  Great  (1193-12S0) ; 
was  formally  adopted  by  the  Council  of  Trent  (1545-63) ; 
and  was  made  the  central  idea  of  the  Bomisb  priest- 
system. 

"  PBIKSTHOOD  "    BXBMPLIFIGD  —  THE    "  PRIEST  "    AT    WORE 

The  Roman  Catholic  teaching  in  regard  to  the  iwwer  of 
the  priest  is  superabundantly  set  forth  in  their  writings. 
Jnst  now  we  are  concerned  with  their  eucharistic  work, 

St.  Alphonsns  Liguori,  whose  standing,  according  to 
"  The  Catholic  Encyclopedia/'  "  allows  confessors  to  fol- 
low any  of  St.  Alphonsus's  own  opinions  without  weighing 
the  reasons  on  which  they  are  based,"  in  his  "  Dignity  and 
Duties  of  the  Priest,"  says: — 

"  With  regard  to  the  power  of  priests  over  the  real  body 
of  Jesus  Christ,  it  is  of  faith  that  when  they  pronounce  the 
words  of  consecration,  the  Incarnate  Word  has  obliged  him- 
self to  obey  and  to  come  into  their  hands  under  the  sacra- 
mental species.  In  obedience  to  the  words  of  his  priests  — 
Hoc  est  corpus  meum  [this  ie  my  body]  —  God  himself  de- 
scends on  the  altar,  comes  wherever  they  call  him,  and  as 
often  as  they  call  him,  and  places  himself  in  their  hands, 
even  though  they  should  be  hie  enemies.  ...  As  in  creating 
the  world  it  was  sufficient  for  God  to  have  said,  Let  it  be 
made,  and  it  was  created,  so  it  is  sufficient  for  the  priest 
to  say,  'Hoc  est  corpus  meum,'  and  behold  the  bread  is 
no  longer  bread,  but  the  body  of  Jesus  Christ.  '  The  power 
of  the  priest,'  says  St.  Bemardine  of  Sienna,  '  is  the  power 
of  the  dirine  person ;  for  the  transubstantiation  of  the 
bread  reqOires  as  mnch  power  as  the  creation  of  the  world.' 
Thus  the  priest  may,  in  a  certain  manner,  be  called  the 
creator  of  his  Creator." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


184  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

At  the  opening  of  the  Eucharistic  Congress  at  Cincinnati, 
Ohio,  September  29,  1911,  Archbishop  Ireland  preached  a 
sermon  upon  the  Eucharist,  in  which  he  is  reported  to  hare 
said; — 

"  Priests  of  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,  you  celebrate 
your  mass.  At  the  moment  of  the  consecration  you  repeat 
the  words  of  Jesus  — '  This  is  my  body,  this  is  the  chalice, 
the  new  testament  in  my  blood'  —  the  bread  is  changed 
into  his  body,  and  the  wine  into  bis  blood :  Jesus  is  on  the 
altar,  fully  man,  fully  God." 

In  the  Western  Watchman  of  St.  Louis,  June  10,  1915,  the 
Editor,  "  Father "  Phelan,  printed  his  sennon  for  the  next 
Sunday,  in  which,  with  brutal  frankness,  he  said: — 

"  I  never  invited  an  angel  down  from  heaven  to  hear 
mass  here.  The  only  person  in  heaven  I  ever  ask  to  come 
down  here  is  Jesus  Christ,  and  him  I  command  to  come 
down.  He  has  to  come  when  I  bid  him.  I  took  bread  in 
my  fingers  this  moroing  and  I  said,  '  This  is  the  body  and 
blood  of  Jesus  Christ,'  and  he  had  to  come  down.  That  is 
one  of  the  things  he  must  do.  He  must  come  down,  every 
time  I  say  mass,  at  my  bidding." 

Here,  surely,  is  priesthood  exemplified  and  the  priest 
very  much  at  work.  And  such  a  blasphemous  farce,  on 
Thanksgiving  days  beginning  with  1909,  at  the  Pan- 
American  mass  in  St.  Patrick's  Church,  Washington,  D. 
C,  have  such  men  as  Presidents  Taft,  Wilson,  members  of 
their  cabinets,  judges  of  the  Supreme  Court,  and  many 
other  high  public  functionaries,  been  constrained  to  wit- 
ness! 

In  the  Catechism  officially  prepared  and  enjoined  by  the 
Third  Plenary  Council  of  Baltimore  (1884),  in  answer  to 
questions,  we  are  told  that  "  Christ  gave  his  priests  the 
power  to  change  bread  and  wine  into  his  body  and  blood 
when  he  said,  'Do  this  for  a  commemoration  of  me'"  {Q. 
891).  This  claim  is  not  true,  of  course,  but  utterly  false, 
for  the  simple  reason  that  Christ  does  not  have  any  cler- 
ical "priests,"  and  no  person  has  any  such  power. 

Again :  "  The  bread  and  wine  are  changed  into  the  body 
and  blood  of  Christ  at  the  consecration  of  the  mass"  (Q. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Priest  — Priesthood  185 

916).  This  is  not  true,  but  utterly  false,  for  the  simple 
reason  that  no  such  change  takes  place  or  has  ever  taken 
place  in  priestly  or  any  other  consecration. 

To  the  retort,  "  Oh,  assertion  "  —  vhich  may  be  thrust 
equally  in  turn  at  either  side  —  we  submit  that  the  Roman 
Catholic  Chnrch  should  accept  the  oft-made  challenge, 
herewith  renewed,  to  submit  any  quantum  they  please  of 
the  alleged  changed  elements  to  the  scientific  and  truthful 
determination  of  a  competent  chemical  analysis,  and  so 
prove  whether  their  traosubstantiation  claim  aBBertff  what 
is  a  fact  or  is  a  falsehood.  In  the  September,  1914,  num- 
ber of  The  Protestant  Magazine,  published  at  Takoma 
Park,  D.  C,  a  challenge  to  such  an  analysis  was  in  most 
respectful  terms  formally  made  to  Mgr.  W.  T.  Buasell,  pas- 
tor of  St.  Patrick's,  but  it  was  not  accepted.  On  the  con- 
trary, compliments  were  paid  to  the  Editor,  by  the  Catholic 
press,  tliat  were  not  altogether  gracious!  Why  not  make 
the  test?  for  surely  it  would  certify  if  bread  becomes  flesh 
and  wine  becomes  blood;  and,  if  true,  the  Catholic  faith 
would  be  incontrovertibly  confirmed  and  the  unbelief  of 
the  Protestant  world  be  forever  confuted.  Certainly,  let 
the  test  be  made.  Thus  would  be  demonstrated  either  an 
article  of  faith  or  an  —  arrant  fraud. 

Still  further  from  the  Catechism :  "  The  mass  is  the  un- 
bloody sacrifice  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ"  (Q.  917). 
"  The  mass  is  the  same  sacrifice  as  that  on  the  cross  "  (Q. 
920).  This  is  untrue,  for  these  statements  atrociously 
contradict  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  where  it  tells  of 
"  the  offering  of  the  body  of  Jeans  Christ  once  for  all " 
(r.  10).  "This  man  after  be  had  offered  one  sacrifice  for 
sins  forever,  sat  down  on  the  right  hand  of  God  "  (x.  12). 
"  For  by  one  offering  he  hath  perfected  forever  them  that 
are  sanctified"  (x.  14).  "This  he  did  once  for  all,  when 
he  offered  up  himself"  (vii.  27).  "There  remaineth  no 
more  a  sacrifice  for  sins"  (x.  26),  and  "apart  from  shed- 
ding of  blood  there  is  no  remission"  of  sins  (ix.  22). 

No  wonder  Cardinal  Bellarmine,  in  his  treatise  on  the 
Eucharist,  admits  that  the  dogma  of  transubstantiation 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


186  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

cannot  be  proved  from  the  Scriptures  (bk.  ill.  chap.  23), 
and  he  quotes  the  assertion  of  John  Duns  Scotus,  the  well- 
known  Boman  theologian,  that  "  before  the  Lateran  Coun- 
cil [1215}  trauBubRtantiation  was  not  a  dogma  of  faith." 
Without  a  shred  of  Biblical  authority,  it  is  simply  a  con- 
ceit of  errant  human  concoction.  And  it  is  to  be  noted  that 
in  the  Authorized  Catechism^  from  which  these  quotations 
are  taken,  there  is  not  a  single  Scripture  reference  in  proof 
of  the  statements  made.  And,  we  may  ask,  why  should 
there  be,  if,  as  Cardinal  Manning,  in  his  book  "  Temporal 
Mission  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  says :  "  We  neither  derive  our 
religion  from  the  Scriptures,  nor  does  it  depend  upon 
them  "  (p.  176)  ?  And  the  editor  of  a  leading  English  Ro- 
man Catholic  journal  says :  "  It  is  strange  that  any  rea- 
sonable man  in  the  present  day  can  imagine  for  a  moment 
that  Almighty  Ood  intended  the  Bible  as  a  text-book  of 
Christian  doctrine"  (The  Month,  Dec.  1888).  According 
to  Romanist  teaching,  the  Bible  rests  on  the  Roman  Cath- 
olic Church,  not  the  church  on  the  Bible.  What  "  the 
Church  "  says  must  therefore  be  true,  Bible  or  no  Bible! 

And  when  we  are  also  told  that  "  mortal  sin  is  a  griev- 
ous offense  against  the  law  of  Ood"  (Q.  280),  and  that 
"  it  is  a  mortal  sin  not  to  hear  mass  on  Sunday  or  on  a 
holiday  of  obligation,  unless  we  are  excused  for  a  serious 
reason  "  (Q.  1329),  it  does  seem  as  if  priestcraft  had  gone 
the  limit  in  "teaching  for  doctrines  the  commandments  of 
men  "  {Matt.  xv.  9). 

The  mass  is  central  in  the  Boman  Catholic  system  of 
worship.    "  The  Catholic  Encyclopedia  "  says : — 

"  That  the  Mass  ...  is  the  central  feature  of  the  Cath- 
olic religion  hardly  needs  to  be  said.  During  the  Refor- 
mation and  always  the  Mass  has  been  the  test.  The  word 
of  the  Reformers :  '  It  is  the  Mass  that  matters,'  was  true  " 
(vol.  ix.  p.  800). 

It  is  plain  to  every  careful  student  that  this  Church 
must  stand  or  (all  with  the  mass.  And  what  is  its  foun- 
dation? Simply  the  false  interpretation  given  the  pas- 
sages oT  Scripture   (Matt.  xxvi.  26-29;  Mark  xiv.  22-25; 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Priest  —  Priesthood  187 

Lake  xxii.  19,  20;  1  Cor.  xi.  23-25)  which  recoant  the  in- 
stitution of  the  Lord's  Supper,  or  indeed  to  a  single  text, 
the  words  Hoc  eat  meum  corpus  (This  is  in;  body)  which 
the  priest  uses  in  the  consecration  of  the  bread  and  wine. 
Before  me  lies  a  disquisition  on  "Tropes  and  Figures  of 
Rhetoric."  A  trope  is  the  turning  of  a  word  from  its  orig- 
inal and  customary  meaning,  and  a  rhetorical  figure  is  a 
mode  of  expression  difterent  from  the  direct  and  simple 
way  of  expressing  the  same  sense.  Thirty-five  tropes  or 
figures  are  named,  among  them  tbe  common  figure  called 
metonymy,  which  is  the  substitution  of  the  name  of  an 
object  for  that  of  another  to  which  it  has  a  certain  rela- 
tion, as  the  cause  for  effect;  sign  for  the  thing  signified; 
container  for  the  thing  contained;  material  tor  the  thing 
made  from  it;  property  for  the  substance;  parts  of  the 
body  for  certain  affections;  place  for  the  inhabitants;  etc. 
For  instance,  if  it  be  said  that  Rome  is  loyally  Catholic, 
the  place  would,  by  metonymy,  be  need  for  the  inhabitants, 
for  not  Rome  the  material  city  is  intended,  but  tbe  people 
thereof.  Why,  we  can  hardly  speak  without  using  this 
figure,  or  some  other.  When  Christ  said,  "I  am  the  door; 
by  me  if  any  man  enter  "  (John  x.  9),  he  did  not  mean  that 
he  was  literally  a  material,  rectangular,  paneled  frame 
with  hinges,  knob,  lock  and  key,  but,  by  a  metonymy,  that 
he  was  as  a  door  figuratively,  a  means,  avenue,  way  of  en- 
trance. When,  speaking  of  the  bread,  he  said,  "  This  is  my 
body,"  he  conld  not  have  meant  that  that  broken  piece  of 
kneaded,  baked  dough  had  been  transubstantiated  into  his 
literal  body  —  else  there  would  have  been  two  Christs 
there,  one  the  speaker  and  the  other  the  element  which  he 
was  handling!  —  but  that  it  stood  for,  represented,  his 
body  which  was  to  be  broken  in  sacrifice  on  the  cross;  and 
80  the  wine  represented  his  blood  which  was  to  be  shed. 
And  when  he  said,  "  This  cup  is  the  new  testament  in  my 
blood,  drink  all  ye  of  it,**  he  did  not  mean  that  they  should 
drink  the  literal  cop,  as  the  Roman  Catholic  principle  of 
interpretation  would  require  —  twelve  men  conld  hardly 
have  swallowed  one  and  the  same  piece  of  crockery  or 


D.qiRzeaOvGoOt^lc 


188  Bibtiotheca  Sacra  [April, 

metal !  —  but,  using  the  figure  of  the  container  for  the 
thing  contained,  he  meant  that  they  should  drink  the  con- 
tents of  the  cup.  We  refrain  from  characterizing  as  it 
deserves  such  a  rhetorical  crime  against  all  interpretative 
rales  of  sane  exegesis.  Maes  —  metonymy:  let  an  unim- 
peachable chemical  analysis  prove  whether  it  rests  upon 
fact,  or  only  upon  a  figure  of  speech. 

PBIBST  —  PBOPHBT 

At  the  outset  we  saw  what  the  priest  was  and  what  his 
office.  But  the  official  priest  proved  inadequate  and  in- 
competent. More  was  needed.  The  priest  functions,  the 
rather,  from  man  toward  God.  What  became  needful  was 
one  who  should  function  from  God  to  man.  Hence  the 
prophet. 

The  common  conception  of  a  prophet  as  simply  a  fore- 
teller of  future  events,  is  true  only  in  part.  Striking 
oflf  the  case  termination  of  the  Greek  word  trpo^r.rif, 
prophSt-Ss,  we  have  the  English  word  prophet,  and  its 
derivation  from  ir/w',  pro,  for,  and  <fntt*ii  pMmi,  to  speak, 
gives  at  once  the  clue  to  its  signification.  A  prophet,  then, 
is  one  who  speaks  for  another,  and  in  Scripture  the  prophet 
is  one  who  speaks  for  Qod.  80  at  first  he  is  a  forth-teller, 
and  then,  as  occasion  requires,  a  fore-teller. 

A  study  of  priest  and  prophet  in  the  tight  of  history  — ■ 
both  Biblical  and  otherwise  —  is  by  no  means  altogether 
cheerful  reading.  We  see  that  marked  contrasts  always 
distinguished  them.  The  world  has  had  little,  if  anything, 
to  hope  for  from  the  priest,  everything  to  hope  for  from 
the  prophet.  The  priest,  while  performing  proper  func- 
tions it  may  be,  has  been  a  dead  weight  on  true  spiritual 
ongoing,  reactionary,  an  obstructionist;  the  prophet  has 
been  a  living  force,  progressive,  a  constructionist,  speak- 
ing for  God,  a  voice  crying  in  the  world's  moral  and  spir- 
itual desolation,  "  Prepare  ye  the  way  of  the  Lord,  make 
his  paths  straight." 

Who  was  it  that  materialized  Deity  into  a  golden 
calf  for  the  people  to  worship?    It  was  priest  Aaron  (Ex. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Priest  —  Priesthood  189 

xxxii.  4).  Who  was  it  that  literally  crammed  the  craas 
concept  down  their  throats  in  hie  endeavor  to  lift  to  a 
hi^er,  nobler,  even  a  spiritual,  conception  of  Qod?  It  was 
prophet  Moses  {Ex..  xzzii.  20). 

Who  was  it  that  led  the  first  Jewish  king  from  his  low, 
perverted,  priestly  apprehensions  of  sacrifice  up  to  a  lofty 
and  true  idea  of  spiritual  service  and  worship?  It  was 
prophet  Samuel  (1  Sam.  xv.),  the  founder  of  the  School 
of  the  Prophets.  And  it  should  not  be  foi^tten  that  it 
was  when,  through  priestly  decline,  the  Urim  and  Thnm- 
mim  worn  upon  the  high  priest's  breast  ceased  to  be  an 
oracle  for  revealing  the  Divine  wiU  (1  Sam.  xiv.  37;  xzviii. 
6),  that  real  prophecy,  real  mediatorship  between  Jehovah 
aud  his  people,  was  set  free  from  its  connection  with  the 
priesthood,  and  Samuel  instituted  the  discipline  of  the 
prophetic  college. 

Who  was  it  that  stood  single-handed  and  alone  against 
a  court  debauched  and  degraded  by  priestcraft,  home  and 
foreign?    It  was  prophet  Elijah  {1  Kings  xviii.). 

Who  was  it  when,  by  priestly  ministrations,  oblations 
to  God  had  become  "  vain,"  incense  an  "  abomination," 
appointed  feasts  hateful  and  fairly  "  wearying "  to  Him, 
sought  to  recover  priests  and  people  to  a  spiritual  concep- 
tion of  Deity  that  has  been  the  uplift  and  illumination  of 
the  ages?  It  was  the  prophet  Isaiah  (see  chap.  1.  and  all 
through  bis  book). 

But  why  go  on  and  exhaust  the  catalogue  of  the  proph- 
ets? for  as  to  prophetic  spirit  they  are  pretty  much  all 
alike. 

"The  thing  that  hath  been,  is  that  which  shall  be;  and 
that  which  hath  been  done,  is  that  which  shall  be  done." 
Prophets  and  priests  are  still  abroad  in  the  land.  But  a 
clear-cnt  line  of  demarcation  cannot  be  drawn,  and  that 
which  belongs  to  the  prophetic  placed  all  on  one  side,  and 
all  that  belongs  to  the  priestly  on  the  other.  These  func- 
tions may,  and  sometimes  do,  have  overlapping.  A  prophet 
may  have  a  bit  of  priestly  infection,  and  it  is  possible  for 
a  priest  to  have  something  of  the  prophetic  spirit. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


190  Btbliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

This  much  allowed,  a  great  outstanding;  fact  is  that 
proptietB,  as  sucli,  belong  to  ProtestaDtiBm,  and  priests 
to  Romanism.  Still,  it  ought  to  be  said  that,  save  for 
the  prlestliness  that  remains  in  the  Protestant  Episcopal 
Church,  there  are  no  "  priests  "  in  the  Protestant  denom- 
inations, while  priests,  wherever  found,  are  so  (ar  Roman- 
ists. Go  into  a  Protestant  church,  and  always  (save  for 
the  possible  exception  in  the  last  sentence)  you  will  find 
the  pulpit  —  the  rostrum  from  which  the  prophet  speaks 
for  God  —  physically,  morally,  spiritually  central;  go  into 
a  Romish  church,  the  altar  is  central,  and  the  pnlpit  off 
one  side.  Indeed,  the  physical  construction  of  their  Gothic 
cathedrals  shows  that  they  were  not  intended  for  instruc- 
tion, but  solely  for  ritual  performances.  The  vacant  space 
between  the  pews  and  the  walls,  usually  separated  by  col- 
umns, was  designed  for  the  procession  of  priests  carrying 
the  "  host,"  and  the  "  ambulatory  "  waa  admirably  fitted 
for  this  purpose,  and  he  would  consider  himself  very  for- 
tunately placed  who  was  in  a  position  to  hear  at  all  satis- 
factorily. The  cathedral  is  as  well-fitted  for  the  mass  as 
it  is  ill-fitted  for  the  sermon,  and  it  expresses  in  stone  what 
the  Catholic  believes  and  what  the  Protestant  repudiates. 
The  prophet's  mind  is  alert,  his  ear  audient,  his  attitude 
that  of  Habakkuk,  "  I  will  watch  to  see  what  he  will  say 
unto  me"  (ii.  1),  and  if  a  true  prophet  he  will  do  as  did 
Jonah  (ii.  2-4),  preach  the  preaching  that  Ood  bids  him; 
the  priest  ministers  at  an  altar,  according  to  a  prepared 
noD-brain-stimulating,  cut-and-dried  ritual,  —  a  ceremony 
the  performance  of  which  tends  to  become  merely  mechan- 
ical, and  the  sermon  is  entirely  secondary.  Dean  Gonlbum 
of  the  Church  of  England  describes  or  defines  the  sermon 
as  "A  homily  delivered  after  service."  What  initiative, 
what  liberty  of  thought,^  what  freedom  of  speech,  what 
latitude  for  delivering  a  present-day  message  from  God, 
by  a  ministry  of  which  Fr.  Phelan  can  say:  "What  the 
Pope  says  is  accepted  as  the  word  of  God ;  what  the  bish- 
'  Count  dl  Campello  of  Home.  ex-Canon  of  51  Peter's,  saya' 
"Tbe  only  crime  a  prieat  can  commit  In  the  eyes  of  hla  Church 
la  to  tliink  tor  blmseU." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Priest  —  Priesthood  191 

ops  say  is  accepted  aa  the  word  o(  the  Pope;  vhat  the 
priests  preach  is  accepted  as  the  word  of  the  biahops " 
{Western  Watchman,  Aug.  1,  1912).  What  mental  bar- 
renneae,  what  eztiuguiahiiig  of  prophetic  appetency,  must 
there  be  if  it  be  true  that  "  There  is  only  one  way  for  a 
man  to  be  a  Catholic,  and  that  is  to  bend  his  knee  in  obe- 
dience to  papal  authority  and  accept  nnreservedly  each 
and  every  article  of  belief  enjoined  by  the  same  authority  " 
{"  Questions  and  Answers,"  Department  of  Truth  [R.  C], 
May,  1913).  And  there  is  "  Motn  Proprio,"  with  rescript 
of  Pope  Pius  X.  (1907)  against  modernism^  with  its  brain- 
benumbing,  conscience-damping,  soul-sbacUing  oath,  which, 
within  six  weeks,  it  is  said,  was  put  up  to  every  Catholic 
priest  in  the  world  to  take,  or  leave  the  Church ;  and  it  is 
also  said  —  a  fact  not  reported  in  the  secular  press  —  that 
scores  uiwn  scores  did  leave  it  rather  than  bind  themselves 
with  an  oath  that  would  stultify  their  minds  and  render 
them  either  hypocrites  or  ■spiritual  slaves. 

And  where  are  the  contemporary  priest-preachers  that 
hare  won  a  place  in  the  same  class  with  Bishop  Simpson, 
Spurgeon,  Joseph  Parker,  Talmage,  Henry  Ward  Beecher, 
Phillips  Brooks,  Jowett,  and  —  "Billy"  Sunday?  not  to 
mention  a  host  of  others. 

In  more  than  fifty  years  of  parish  experience  we  have 
never  found  a  Catholic  priest  who  would  enter  into  united 
work  for  community  civic,  social,  or  moral  betterment. 
Such  work  has  always  been  carried  on  under  Protestant 
leadership.  Temperance  forces  have  long  had  the  slogan, 
"  The  saloon  must  go,"  There  have  bewi  some  grand,  ring- 
ing words  in  behalf  of  temperance  by  Catholics,  —  Arch- 
bishops Ireland,  Eeene,  and  others.  But  really,  we  cannot 
help  questioning  how  much  these  words  mean.  Lying  on 
the  desk  where  this  writing  is  going  on,  is  a  copy  of  The 
Baltimore  Catholic  Retnew  (May  23,  1914)  —  Cardinal 
Gibbons's  organ  —  in  which  is  an  editorial  on  behalf  of 
"  The  Saloon,"  having  these  sentences : — 

"  We  have  no  patience  with  the  effort  of  those  who  want 
to  abolish  saloons  without  restriction  and  discrimination. 
.  .  .  Human  nature  remains  the  same  always ;  the  race  will 
Vol  LXXVI.    No.  802.    4 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


192  Bihliotheca  Sacra 

get  stimulants  of  some  kind  or  other.  .  .  .  The  majority  o( 
men  Deed  the  saloon  or  something  like  it." 
According  to  a  press  despatch  in  the  New  York  Times  of 
August  9,  1912,  when  the  Convention  of  the  Catholic  Total 
Abstinence  Union  was  in  progress  in  Notre  Dame,  Indiana, 
its  president,  the  Rev.  Peter  Callaghan  of  Chicago,  an- 
nounced that  he  bad  received  a  communication  from  the 
Pope  commanding  that  the  members  of  the  Union  have  no 
connection  with  the  Prohibition  Party.  A  tremendous  bat- 
tle is  being  waged  for  a  Constitntional  Amendment  that 
will  make  the  United  States  "  dry." '  According  to  the 
newspapers,  on  February  5,  1918,  Cardinal  Oibbons  issued 
a  statement  declaring  himself  opposed  to  the  movement. 
"  In  strong  and  decisive  language  Cardinal  Oibbons  de- 
nounced the  national  prohibition  amendment  and  declared 
that  legislators  of  the  states  should  not  bow  to  the  '  fanat- 
icism that  seenxs  to  be  ruling  us  in  this  respect.' "  In  June 
Archbishop  S.  G.  Messmer  of  Wisconsin,  in  a  pastoral  let- 
ter, said :  "  I  hereby  positively  forbid  all  pastors  of  par- 
ishes in  this  archdiocese  from  allowing  any  prohibition 
speeches  to  be  given  on  any  premises,  be  it  the  church,  the 
school,  or  a  haU."  When  the  temperance  forces  prevailed 
in  Washington  to  make  the  capital  city  "  dry,"  they  got 
up  a  great  Sunday  jubilee  meeting  in  one  of  the  tbeatera. 
Multitudinous  were  the  Protestant  ministers  abetting.  The 
"  wets  "  prepared  at  the  same  time  a  counter  meeting,  and 
among  the  speakers  was  Mgr.  Bussell  —  since  made  Bishop 
of  Charleston — the  one  only  clergyman  to  champion  the 
cause  of  booze !  In  view  of  the  foregoing,  should  we  say, 
but  from  another  standpoint,  "  Priesthood  Exemplified  — 
the  Priest  at  Work  "? 

Priest  —  priesthood:  let  it  be  said  as  the  final  word  and 
remembered  forevermore,  that  each  believer  is,  after 
Christ,  his  own  priest,  and  that  in  Christ's  Church  there  Is 
no  place  for  any  other  priesthood. 

'  since  thiB  woB  written,  an  AmendmeDt  to  the  Constitution  of 
the  United  States  has  been  adopted  by  sevenl  more  than  the  re- 
quired (36)  number  of  States,  making  the  vbole  country  lesaUy 
"dry"  January  16,  1920. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


COMTEIBUTIOK8  TO  A  NEW  THEORY  OF  THE 
COMPOSITION  OP  THE  PENTATEUCH  (III.) 

HAROLD  M.  WIENBBj  H.A.^  IX.8.,  OF  LINCOLN'S  INN 
BABBISTBR-AT-LAW 


In  the  preceding  articles '  we  saw  reaaon  to  believe  that 
the  Pentateuch  had  at  one  time  consisted  of  a  library  of 
small  vritingB  which  underwent  damage  and  derangement 
and  were  subsequently  incorporated  in  scroll  form.  Edi- 
torial efforts  to  remedy  matters  tended  to  increase  the 
confusion,  and,  combined  with  glossing,  longer  commen- 
tary, and  the  natural  deterioration  of  a  US.  text,  helped 
to  produce  the  state  of  affairs  with  which  we  are  familiar. 
It  was  sQ^ested  that  one  of  the  methods  to  which  editors 
might  have  resorted  was  rewriting. 

In  the  interval  which  has  elapsed  since  the  publication 
of  the  second  of  these  papers,  a  controversy  has  arisen 
about  the  date  of  the  Exodus,*  in  the  course  of  which  it 
was  said  that  the  question  of  the  itinerary  of  Num.  xxxiii. 
would  be  examined  after  the  writer's  demobilization. 
That  promise  it  is  now  proposed  to  redeem. 

The  Samaritan  recension  of  the  Pentateuch  throws  con- 
siderable light  on  methods  that  were  adopted  in  the  edi- 
torial age;  and,  in  considering  any  one  of  these,  we  tiare 
to  ask  ourselves,  whether  it  was  peculiar  to  the  Samari- 
tans, or  whether  they  merely  applied  a  mode  of  procedure 
that  was  or  had  been  in  vogue  among  the  Jews.  We  have 
had  several  instances  in  which  the  latter  proved  to  be  the 
case.  Glossing  is  common  to  both  texts,  and  a  compar- 
ison of  the  two  often  reveals  on  which  side  the  expansion 
lies.    The  Samaritans  are  famous  for  their  additions  to 

'BS  for  January  and  April,  191S. 

•See  Ba,  Oct  1918. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


IM  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

the  teita  of  earlier  books  from  Dewteronomj  and  parallel 
passages  (as  also  to  the  text  o(  Denteronoiay  from  the 
earlier  books),  and  we  found  that  in  Num.  xzl.  33-35  the 
MasHoretic  text  shared  their  addition,  which,  however,  was 
wanting  in  the  Old  Latin,  and  consequently  in  the  Hebrew 
original  of  the  LXX.  We  discovered  that  Ex.  xix.  1-10 
was  not  in  its  proper  position  in  our  Hebrew;  and,  when 
we  meet  with  it  after  xxvi.  35  in  the  Samaritan,  we  recog- 
nize that  both  recensions  alike  have  made  unsuccessful 
attempts  to  discover  its  true  position.  Consequently,  when 
we  find  the  Samaritans  adopting  a  particular  editorial 
method,  we  cannot  dismiss  it  offhand  as  something  pecul- 
iar to  them,  and  rule  out  the  possibility  of  its  having  pre- 
vailed among  the  Jews.  We  must  carefully  examine  the 
reasons  for  their  conduct  and  the  marks  that  distinguish 
their  production,  and  we  must  then  see  whether  the  Mas- 
soretic  text  shows  any  passages,  distinguished  by  like 
marks,  where  similar  reasons  may  have  been  in  operation. 
If  this  should  prove  to  be  the  case,  we  must  consider 
whether  they  are  not  the  products  of  earlier  applications 
of  the  same  editorial  methods. 

Now  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch  is  remarkable  for  (inter 
alia)  the  presence  of  a  number  of  larger  rewritings  or 
supplements,  and  a  study  of  some  of  these  throws  an  in- 
teresting light  on  our  problem.  In  Num.  iii.  13  we  find 
a  very  significant  change.  Here  are  the  two  texts  side  by 
side : — 

M.  T.  Sam. 

Thence  thej   journeyed  {DB«  And  they  Journeyed  from  the 

IJTDJ)  and  pitched,  etc.  brook     Zered    (ml    ^iniD   IJKn) 

and  pitched,  etc 

The  importance  of  this  is  twofold.  Slight  as  the  dif- 
ference looks,  it  is  one  of  type.  The  Massoretic  reading 
gives  the  statement  in  a  form  unlike  that  of. the  itinerary 
of  Num.  xxiiii.,  and  is  attributed  by  the  documentary 
theorists  to  one  of  their  early  narratives  (E).  The  Sa- 
njaritan,  on  the  other  hand,  has  the  familiar  stereo^ped 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  195 

formala  of  the  itinerary;  and,  had  the  docomentary  theo- 
rists worked  on  tliis  text  without  knowledge  of  any  of  our 
other  copies,  they  must  in  consistency  have  attributed  the 
verse  to  their  late  "  source  "  (P) .  It  will  be  recalled  that 
we  met  with  similar  instances  in  Genesis,  where  Greek 
texts  presented  us  with  "  JE  "  originals  of  "  P  "  verses.' 

And  this  leads  to  the  second  point.  Just  as,  in  those 
verses  of  Genesis,  we  were  able  to  see  that  the  phenomena 
which  had  attracted  the  attention  of  the  critical  theorists 
were  due  to  editorial  causes,  and  not  to  a  combination  of 
preexisting  documents ;  so  here  we  are  enabled,  by  the  con- 
text, to  see  exactly  what  has  happened.  The  Samaritans 
maintained  the  original  text  of  verse  12,  "  Thence  they 
journeyed  and  camped  at  the  brook  Zered,"  because,  in 
spite  of  its  being  preceded  by  a  shori:  insertion  from  Deu- 
teroDODiy,  there  was  no  sufficient  reason  to  alter  it.  But 
at  this  point  they  added  a  further  extract  from  Deut.  ii. 
17-19,  which  was  so  long  as  to  make  the  initial  "  thence  " 
of  verse  13  cumbrous  and  unintelligible.  Therefore  they 
resorted  to  the  change.  Thus  we  see  that,  at  a  point  where 
a  dislocation  of  the  narrative  rendered  the  original  phrase- 
ology unsuitable,  a  Samaritan  editor  smoothed  the  text  J>y 
an  alteration  which  took  the  form  of  the  unnecessarily 
long-winded  formula  ascribed  by  the  documentary  theo- 
rists to  P.  That,  then,  is  the  origin  of  the  supposititious  P 
in  one  passage.    Can  this  be  the  case  in  others  too? 

The  formala  is  found  again  in  Ex.  xiii.  20 ;  xvii.  1 ;  xix. 
2;  Num.  xii.  10,  Ha;  xxii.  1,  as  well  as  in  the  itinerary. 
Aud  here  a  word  of  caution  is  necessary.  It  is  by  no  means 
impossible  that  au  old  writer  should  occasionally  have 
written  "  and  they  journeyed  from  A  and  encamped  in 
B,"  instead  of  "  thence  they  journeyed  to  B,"  or  "  they 
journeyed  from  A  to  B,"  or  some  similar  phrase  (see  Ex. 
xii.  37;  Num.  x.  a3;  xi.  35;  xii.  16;  xi.  22a).  But  (a)  it 
is  most  unlikely  that  he  should  have  done  so  continuously 
in  a  long  passage  like  the  itinerary;  and  (b)  it  is  probable 
■  See  BS.  ApHl,  191S,  p.  246. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


196  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

that  an  editor  who  had  to  trim  the  ragged  edges  of  the 
narrative  would  have  preferred  this  formala,  which  io  its 
long-windedness  and  stressing  of  the  obvious  fact  of  camp- 
ing harmonized  bo  well  with  the  ideals  of  an  epoch  that 
soQ^t  to  enlarge  Torah.  When  we  examine  the  other 
occnrrences  we  see  at  a  glance  that  several  of  them  are  at 
points  where  there  are  obvioos  breaks  in  the  narrative.  It 
is  well  known  that  the  text  of  these  chapters  of  Numtters 
is  not  in  order.'  0r.  Q,  B.  Qray,  in  commenting  on  zxL 
10-zziL  1,  begins  with  the  sentence  "  The  passage  contains 
the  work  of  man;  writers/'  and  points  out  numerous  in- 
consistencies in  its  present  form.  With  xxi.  9  the  stor; 
of  the  brazen  serpent  ends,  and  there  ia  nothing  to  show 
what  ought  to  follow  it.  When,  therefore,  we  read :  "And 
they  [so  Vulgate:  M,  T.,  "the  children  of  Israel"]  jour- 
neyed, and  pitched  In  Ottoth.  And  they  journeyed  from 
Oboth,  and  pitched  at  lye-abarim,"  the  easiest  explanation 
is  to  regard  the  phraseology  as  the  work  of  an  editor,  who, 
owing  to  the  fragmentary  and  dislocated  state  of  the  nar- 
rative, found  himself  confronted  with  some  such  text  as 
this :  "  when  he  looked  unto  the  serpent  of  brafis,  he  lived. 
Thence  to  Oboth,  .  .  .  and  thence  to  lye-abarim."  In  these 
circumstances  he  made  what  changes  were  necessary  to 
render  the  story  intelligible  without  introducing  any  ad- 
ditional information.  It  will  be  observed  that  be  has  not 
attempted  to  give  the  name  of  the  station  from  which  they 
went  to  Oboth.  He  has  confined  himself  to  making  the 
text  readable,  and  it  is  not  clear  that  an  uncritical  age 
could  have  done  anything  better. 

In  xxii.  1  the  facts  are  similar.  Again  we  have  a  dam- 
aged narrative.  Whether  we  retain  or  remove  the  late 
insertion  from  Deuteronomy,  which  now  immediately  pre- 
cedes this  verse,  we  find  an  unmistakable  gap.  Here,  then, 
the  statement  "  and  the  chUdren  of  Israel  journeyed 
and  pitched,"  etc.  (again,  be  it  noted,  withont  a  termimu 
a  quo),  probably  represents  an  editorial  version  of  an 
earlier  fragment. 

>  See  EPC,  pp.  114~13S:   B8,  Oct  1918,  pp.  G7S-E80. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  197 

In  EzodQB  we  find  xix.  2  following  the  misplaced  chap- 
ter xviii. ;  so  that,  wlthoat  entering  for  the  present  on  the 
critical  questions  connected  with  zlx.  1,  we  can  see  that 
it  may  probably  be  a  rewriting  of  an  earlier  formula.  In 
zvii.  1  the  facts  are  eimUar.  The  matter  that  at  present 
precedes  is  not  the  original  context  of  the  statement  that 
the  Israelites  jonmeyed  to  Rephidim. 

That  leaves  only  xiii.  20;  and  it  is  impossible  to  say 
whether  verses  19  and  20  were  originally  conaecntive,  or 
whether  there  has  been  some  lesion  to  the  text. 

So  far,  then,  our  investigation  shows  ub  that,  in  some 
of  the  minor  passages  in  which  it  occurs,  the  fonuola  is 
probably  due  to  editorial  work  similar  to  the  Samaritan 
change  in  Num.  xxi.  13,  and  that  it  may  be  so  in  all.  As 
already  indicated,  it  cannot  plausibly  be  held  to  be  early 
in  Num.  xxxiii. 

Before  proceeding  to  the  consideration  of  the  second  Sa- 
maritan alteration  which  illuminates  the  probable  antece- 
dents of  that  passage,  a  word  must  be  said  about  the  death 
of  Aaron.  According  to  the  most  original  texts  known  to 
us  of  Deut,  X.  6  f.,  the  Israelites  were  at  Moserah  when 
Aaron  died.  This  conclusion  can  be  avoided  only  by  pos- 
tulating a  lacuna  in  the  middle  of  the  verse,  thus :  —  "  and 
the  children  of  Israel  journeyed  from  Beeroth-Bene-jaa- 
kan  to  Moserah  .  .  .  there  Aaron  died,"  There  is  nothing 
to  show  this  to  be  probable,  and  we  must  therefore  accept 
Moserah  as  the  scene  of  the  encampment  in  this  account. 
According  to  most  texts  of  Num.  xx.  f.,  the  Israelites  were 
in  Mount  Hor  at  the  time.  There  are,  however,  Greek 
variants,  supported  by  some  other  evidence,  which  make  • 
it  appear  that  this  is  not  original.  There  is,  in  fact,  a 
formal  contradiction  between  the  statements  of  ix.  22,  23, 
zxi.  4a  that  the  Israelites  were  on  Mount  Hor,  and  the 
command  of  verse  25,  with  its  fulfillment  in  verse  27,  to 
bring  up  to  the  mount.  How  could  men  who  were  already 
there  be  brought  up  to  the  mount? 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


198  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

la  verse  23  we  find  the  foUowing  readings : — 
(i)     "  In  Hor,  the  mount,  by  the  border  of  the  land  of 
Edom"  {M.T.  and  most  authorities), 
(ii)     "In  Hop"  (m). 

(iii)  "In  the  monnt  by  the  border  of  the  land  of 
Edom  "  (Bj  HP  71,  84) . 

(it)  "Id  Hor,  the  mount,  by  the  t>order  of  the  land  of 
Moab"  (Sahidic). 

Only  one  theory  exhausts  this  evidence.  The  Hebrew 
word  for  "  mount "  is  used  equally  for  mountain  country. 
The  earliest  reading  to  which  the  variants  witneee  ie  "  in 
the  mountain  country  by  the  border  of  (the  land  of) 
Moab."  A  glossator  then  erroneously  wrote  in  the  word 
"  Hor,"  locating  the  Israelites  on  the  mountain  itself,  in- 
stead of  in  the  mountain  country  at  its  foot.  That  may 
have  given  us  the  text  of  m.  The  other  texts  have  arisen 
through  conflation  of  the  two  readings,  combined  (except 
in  the  case  of  the  Sahidic)  with  an  erroneous  correction 
of  "  Edom  "  into  "  Moab,"  baaed  on  the  present  contest  of 
the  passage.'  Now  we  have  already  seen,  in  the  longer 
discussions  to  which  reference  has  been  made,*  that  these 
passages  are  out  of  order.  Verse  22a  should  not  imme- 
diately precede  the  narrative  of  Aaron's  death,  nor  should 
xxi,  1-3  follow  it.  I  believe,  therefore,  that  xx.  22b  and 
xxi.  4a  are  erroneous  editorial  additions,  patching  up  the 
fragmentary  narrative  in  its  present  order;  and  that  the 
Greek  variants  point  to  an  earlier  form,  in  which  the  chil- 
dren of  Israel  were  at  a  place  in  the  mountain  country  in 
the  border  of  Moab  at  the  foot  of  Monnt  Hor,  There  ia  no 
reason  whatever  to  doubt  that  the  name  of  the  place  was 
Moserah,  as  Deuteronomy  states. 

'Se«  BS.  Oct.  1918,  pp.  678,  679. 
■  BPC,  pp.  114-188;  BS.  Oct  1918. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919] 


Composition  of  the  Pentateuch 


And  80  we  come  to  the  Samaritaa  text  of  Dent.  x.  6 1. 
set  it  ont  with  the  parallel  passages  of  the  M.  T. 


Deut  I.  6-7  (M.  T.) 
And  the  children 
of  larael  Journeyed 
from  B«eroth  Bene- 
jaakan  to  Hoserah: 
there  Aaron  died, 
and  there  he  was 
burled;  and  Eleazar 
his  son  inlnletered 
Id  the  priest's  of- 
fice In  his  stead. 
FVom  thence  they 
Journeyed  unto  Gud- 
godab;  and  from 
Qudgodab  to  Jotba- 
thah,  a  land  of 
broolu  of  water. 


Deut  X,  8-7  (Sam.) 
And  tbe  children 
of  Israel  Journeyed 
( yvDJ  )  from  HoBC- 
roth,  and  pitched  Id 
Bene-Jaakan.  Thence 
they  Journeyed  and 
pitched  In  Hag- 
gudgodab:  thence 
they  Journeyed  and 
pitched  In  Jotba- 
thah,  a  land  of 
Irooki  of  water. 
Thence  they  Jour- 
neyed and  pitched 
In  Abronab;  thence 
they  Journeyed  and 
pitched  In  Ezlon- 
geber:  thence  they 
Journeyed  and 
pitched  In  tbe  wil- 
derness of  Zln  (the 
same  Is  Kadesh). 
Thence  they  Jour- 
neyed and  pitched 
In  Hor  the  moun- 
tain, and  Aaron  died 
there  and  wo*  bur- 
ied there  and  Elea- 
sar  hia  son  tnlnii- 
tered  in  the  prietVt 
oUlce  in  hia  ateaS. 


Num.  mill.  31-38 
And  they  Journeyed 
from  Uoseroth,  and 
pitched  iB  Bene-Jaa- 
kan.  And  they  Jour- 
neyed from  Bene-Jaa- 
kan,  and  pitched  In 
Hor-Hoggldgad.  And 
ther  Journeyed  from 
Ror-haggldgad  and 
pitched  In  Jotba- 
thah.  And  they  Jour- 
neyed from  Jotba- 
thah,  and  pitched  In 
Abronah.  And  they 
Journeyed  from  Ab- 
ronah, and  pitched 
In  Ezlon-geber.  And 
they  Journeyed  from 
Ezlon-geber,  and 
pitched  In  the  wll- 
demesB  of  Zln  (tbe 
same  Is  Kadesh). 
And  they  Journeyed 
from  Kadeeh,  and 
pitched  m  Mount 
Hor,  In  the  edge  of 
the  land  of  Edom. 
And  Aaron  the  priest 
went  up  Into  Mount 
Hor  at  tbe  command- 
ment   o(    the    Lord, 


and  died  there.  In  the  fi 
come  out  of  the  land  o 
of  the  month. 

In  Num.  xxxiii.  32  f.,  the  Samaritan  reads  Hor  Haggud- 
godah. 

What  has  happened  aDd  why?  The  glaring  contradic- 
tion between  the  Deuteronomy  passage  and  the  present 
texts  of  Num.  xx.  and  xxxiii.  attracted  attention,  and  the 
Samaritan  editors  apparently  judged  that  there  must  be 
a  mistake  and  set  themselves  to  remove  it.  They  coined 
the  form  Haggudgodah  (if  we  vocalize  it  thus),  out  of 
Oudgodah  and  Haggidgad,  for  adoption  in  both  passages. 
For  the  other  names  they  adopted  the  Numbers  forms. 


D.qit.zeapvG00t^lc 


200  BibUotheca  Sacra  [April, 

They  then  rewrote  the  shorter  Deut  x.  6-7  on  the  basis  of 
the  longer  Nnm.  xxxiii.,  which  they  thonght  correct  in  fact, 
but  preserved  the  formula  of  the  Denteronomy  original 
("thence  they  journeyed,"  etc.),  to  which  the  context 
made  no  difficulties.  Special  notice  should  be  taken  of  the 
way  in  which  they  have  incorporated  the  little  additional 
touches  of  Deuteronomy. 

It  is  submitted  that  the  present  fonu  of  the  itinerary  in 
Num.  xxxiii.  is  due  to  the  methods  we  have  seen  at  work 
in  these  passages  of  the  Samaritan  Pentateuch,  and  that 
the  necessity  for  their  application  art>se  from  the  custo- 
dians of  the  text  being  confronted  with  some  fragments  of 
the  original  in  doubtful  order  and  in  a  form  which  made 
such  editorial  effort  necessary  if  the  passage  was  to  read 
at  all.  It  is  further  suggested  that  Dent  x.  6-7  is  prob- 
ably a  misplaced  fragment  of  the  original  itineraiy,  and 
that  other  fragments  are  preserved  in  what  is  now  Num. 
xzi  On  the  other  band,  it  is  likely  that  some  fragments 
relating  to  Beerotb-benejaakan,  Uoserah,  Qudgodab,  and 
Jotbathah  which  originally  preceded  and  followed  the 
account  of  Aaron's  death  in  Num.  xx.  were  erroneously 
thought  to  belong  to  the  itinerary,  and  consequently  in- 
corporated in  it.  To  make  this  theory  clear  we  must  look 
carefully  at  the  phenomena  of  the  itinerary  and  Num.  zxi. 

A.  Tlie  itinerary  of  Num.  xxxiii.  cannot  be  in  an  early 
original  form  for  the  following  reasons : — 

1.  It  does  not  correspond  with  the  true  original  order 
of  the  narrative.' 

2.  In  the  matter  of  Aaron's  death  it  is,  as  we  have  seen, 
in  glaring  contradiction  with  Deut.  z.  6-7,  as  also  (in  the 
location  of  Hor  on  the  frontier  of  Edom)  with  the  earliest 
text  of  Num.  xx.  23. 

3.  The  forty  stations  are  clearly  an  artificial  number, 
Ezion-geber  and  Kadesb  (ver.  36),  which  are  given  as  con- 

'  For  tltlB,  reference  must  be  made  to  BPC,  pp.  114-188;  BS,  Juty, 
1916,  pp.  «68  r.,  Oct.  1918,  pp.  676-680. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  201 

secutive,  are  in  reality  seventy  milee  apart,  and  the  ronte, 
80  far  as  it  can  be  traced,  Ib  absurd.* 

4.  The  intolerably  tedious  and  repetitions  form  smacks 
of  the  editorial  age. 

B.  Chapter  zxxiii.  mentions  seventeen  stations  that  are 
not  otherwise  known,  and  also  contains  three  statements 
(ver.  2,  4a,  38b)  not  based  on  anything  extant  elsewhere. 
Now  two  of  these  are  in  the  itinerary,  and  give  little 
touches  exactly  parallel  to  those  found  in  Deut.  x.  6-7  and 
incorporated  by  the  Samaritans  in  their  rewriting  of  that 
passage.  Further,  it  mentions  (ver.  30-34)  Uoseroth, 
Bene-jaakan,  Hor-haggidgad,  and  Jotbathah.  It  will  be 
observed  that  these  are  fundamentally  identical  with  the 
Beeroth  Bene-jaakan,  Moserah,  Gudgodal^  and  Jotba- 
tbah,  of  Deuteronomy,  bnt  that  the  order  of  reaching  Mo- 
serah differs.  This  and  the  slight  variations  in  the  names 
forbid  the  assumption  that  our  chapter  is  based  on  the 
Benteronomy  passage,  which  is  obviously  a  fragment  of 
an  itinerary :  but  we  have  seen  that  the  original  beginning 
and  end  of  the  narrative  of  Aaron's  death  in  Num.  xx.  are 
missing.  That  was  a  tattered  passage,  and  the  conjecture 
lies  near  at  hand  that  three  fragments  belonging  to  it  orig- 
inally ran  in  something  like  the  following  form: — 

(a)     Thence  they  journeyed  to  Bene-jaakan. 

(6)  Thence  they  journeyed  to  Moser  (the  last  letter  not 
being  written). 

(c)  Thence  they  jonmeyed  to  Hor-Haggidgad,  and 
thence  to  Jotbathah. 

These  were  not  recognized  as  belonging  to  the  larger  frag- 
ment, which  teUs  of  the  death  of  Aaron,  and  were  incor- 
porated in  the  itinerary,  (a)  and  (b)  being  accidentally 
placed  in  the  wrong  order. 

C.  At  this  point  we  must  turn  for  a  moment  to  Num.  xxi. 
We  have  already  seen  that  verses  33-35  are  not  original. 
The  campaign  against  Sihon  (ver.  21-25)  is  part  of  the 
original  narrative.  At  the  end  of  verse  24  we  should 
read,  with  the  LXX,  "  for  Jaazer  hir.  not  with  M.  T.  W. 

*  Se«  Gray,  Numbers,  pp.  442  f. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


202  BibUotheca  Sacra  [-'^pi^ 

"  strong,"  wbich  is  obviously  the  remains  of  a  damaged 
word)  is  the  border  o(  the  chUdren  of  Ammoo."  •  The 
mention  of  Jaazer  in  verse  24  connects  naturally  with 
verse  32.  The  intervening  verses  (26-^1)  are  a  commen- 
tator's addition,  and  verse  31  resumes  verse  25  after  the 
addition,  just  as  in  Ex.  vi.  verses  28-30  again  take  up  the 
thread  of  the  narrative  where  it  had  been  interrupted  in 
verse  13  by  the  insertion  of  the  commentary  which  now 
intervenes. 

These  passages  are  all  fragments;  for,  as  we  see  from 
Deuteronomy,  there  are  other  narratives  which  are  miss- 
ing, and  possibly  the  clauses  "  for  Amon  is  the  border  of 
Moab"  (ver.  15),  "for  Jaazer  is  the  border  of  the  chil- 
dren of  Ammou,"  glauce  at  lost  Numbers  equivalents  of 
Deut.  ii.  9,  19,  the  narrative  in  each  case  explaining  that 
the  Israelites  kept  outside  the  territory  covered  by  these 
prohibitions. 

What  preceded  the  relation  of  the  war  against  Sihoo? 
Here  geography  helps  us.  Of  Kum.  xxi.  20,  I>r.  (now 
Sir)  G.  A.  Smith  writes:— 

"  One  thing  is  certain ;  this  journey,  tbongh  it  is  de- 
scribed in  the  Book  of  Numbers  before  the  war  with  Sihon, 
must  have  come  after  the  latter.  No  host,  so  large  and 
cumbered  as  this,  could  have  ventured  down  any  of  the 
glens  from  the  Plateau  to  the  Jordan  before  their  own 
warriors  had  occupied  Heshbon,  for  Heshbon,  standing 
above  them,  commands  these  glens."  * 

■  It  iB  conceivable  that  ver.  26  should  run  "  and  Israel  took  his 
cltl«fl,"  not  "all  these  cities"  (M.  T.).  Ab  we  have  ae«D  (BS,  Jul;, 
1914,  pp.  471  f.),  "all"  Is  a  very  common  gloBB.  and  le  omitted  la 
this  paasage  by  K  12S  and  n;  vhlle,  tor  "  these,"  o  and  the  Vulgate 
read  "  his."  That  would  remove  the  dUBcuUj  created  bj  the  fact 
that  the  Massoretlc  "all  these  cities"  refers  to  nothing;  In  the 
present  text:  but  It  Is  not  easy  to  see  how  "  these  "  came  Into  the 
text  If  that  Is  correct  It  seems  more  likely  that  "  these  cities  "  Is 
the  original  text,  and  that  the  reference  Is  to  something  that  has 
been  lost,  "  his  cities "  being  an  attempt  to  smooth  over  the  diffi- 
culty. 

'Historical  Oeography  of  the  Holy  Land  (7th  thousand),  pp. 
664  f. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  203 

In  Judges  xi.  18  f.  we  read  "...  for  Amou  ia  the  border 
of  Moab.  19  And  Israel  sent  messengers."  This  agrees  with 
the  geographical  position.  It  may  therefore  be  coajectared 
that  this  is  the  right  order;  and  that  verses  16-20  did  not 
originally  stand  in  their  present  position,  but  belong  to 
the  itinerary.  It  fits  in  well  with  this  that  Num.  rxxiii. 
makes  no  mention  of  any  of  the  places  to  which  these 
verses  refer.  Verses  14  f.  are  clearly  due  to  an  anuotator, 
who  was  reminded  of  some  verses  about  the  Amon  by 
what  he  read  here.* 

D.  Returning  to  Num.  xxxiil.,  we  note  the  statement 
of  Mosaic  authorship  in  verse  2.  After  what  we  have  seen 
of  the  way  in  which  the  editors  preserved  incidental  touches 
and  avoided  adding  matter  of  their  own,  the  candid  in- 
quirer can  only  admit  that  there  is  no  ground  whatever 
for  doubting  that  they  found  this  statement  in  their  or- 
iginal materials. 

Thus  we  can  now  envisage  the  problems  which  con- 
fronted them.  The  original  books  had  contained  {inter 
alia)  the  ExoduS'Nnmbers  main  narrative  and  also  an 
itinerary.  Both  had  become  tattered  and  disarranged.  Of 
the  itinerary,  one  little  piece  had  lodged  between  two 
"  books "  of  Deuteronomy,  just  as  a  little  piece  of  the 
Numbers  narrative  had  strayed  in  at  another  point  of 
jnnction  (iv.  41  ft.).  Of  the  remainder,  some  were  wrongly 
incorporated  in  Num.  iz. ;  and  that  left  over  some  obvious 
fragments  of  itinerary,  including  the  notices  of  verses  2  and 
4a,  and  some  shreds  of  narrative  in  forms  like  "  thence  they 
journeyed  to  x,"  which,  whether  rightly  or  wrongly,  were 
conceived  to  have  belonged  to  the  itinerary.  The  least 
that  any  editor  could  do  in  those  days  was  to  connect 
them  in  readable  form,  rewriting  in  bis  own  language 
where  necessary.  (That  task  had  of  course  to  be  accom- 
plished without  any  geographical  knowledge  of  the  desert 
stations.)  Whether  the  first  editors  did  more  than  this 
we  cannot  say.    There  are  some  readings  in  Greek  cur- 

'  See  Critical  Note,  "  The  Text  of  Numbers  xxl.  Ut.,"  BS,  April, 
1919,' pp.  232-234. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


204  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

Bives  which  Bnggeet  that  in  the  Hebrew  text  known  to  the 
LXX  the  present  formnla  may  not  have  occurred  throngh- 
OQt.  Thns,  for  verae  21,  d  has  "  then  to  Desa  (Biasah) ; 
p"  and  s,  "and  they  camped  in  I)esa"  {s,  "Dessa");  in 
verse  40,  d  and  p  show  similar  variations  (see  also  d's 
reading  in  Dent.  x.  6)  ';  and  in  sereral  verses  d  has  a 
shorter  formula  (see  ver.  25,  26,  28,  30),  indicating  that 
its  original  before  correction  presented  "  from  A  to  B  "  in 
more  than  one  instance.'  Consequently  the  uniformity  of 
phrase  is  not  necessarily  due  to  the  first  editors.  It  may 
have  resulted  from  Bubseqaent  correction.  Further,  the 
number  of  journeys  was  brought  up  to  make  the  obviously 
artificial  number  of  forty  intermediate  stages,  and  the 
chapter  was  probably  conformed  to  the  main  Numt>ers  nar- 
rative (ver.  37).'  We  canaot  tell  whether  these  changes 
were  due  to  the  first  editors  or  to  their  successors.  Gloss- 
ing, and  probably  deterioration  in  some  of  the  names,  com- 
pleted the  tale. 

Such  a  view  as  this  appears  to  explain  all  the  facts  in 
the  light  of  the  other  phenomena  of  the  Pentateuch  and 
the  known  methods  of  the  editorial  ages. 

In  reference  to  the  Exodus  controversy  it  may  now  be 
said  that,  on  farther  examination,  I  find  myself  in  agree- 

*  On  the  otber  hand,  (irn  (then)  may  be  a  scribal  note  adopted 
where,  for  some  reason.  It  was  not  desired  to  repeat  the  formula, 
or  perhaps  as  a  reference  to  a  longer  correction  In  the  margin  ^ 
"then  *■"  i.e.  "take  In  the  Journey  to  x  at  this  point"  (cp.  A,  C. 
Clark,  The  Descent  of  Manuscripts  [1918],  pp.  34  f.). 

'  The  algnlflcance  of  this  will  be  appreciated  when  we  recall  the 
tact  that  there  Is  clear  evidence  that  the  archetrpe  of  dpt  was  a 
MS.  of  one  type  which  had  been  corrected  to  present  readings  of 
another.  Its  descendants  sometimes  fall  to  give  the  corrections, 
or  give  them  In  different  places.     See  the  readings  In  Deut.  x.  6 1. 

'  In  this  matter  too  we  can  parallel  the  action  of  the  editors  from 
the  Samaritan  Pentateucb.  We  have  seen  the  lesson  that  mar  be 
learnt  from  the  change  In  Deut.  x.  6f.;  and  there  are  other  In- 
stances (see  e.g.  Ex.  xvlU.  26,  where  the  Samaritan  substitutes  a 
passage  founded  on  Deut.  I.).  In  these  cases  the  editorial  prin- 
ciple seems  to  have  been  to  give  the  preference  to  tbe  longer  and 
more  detailed  account. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  205 

ment  with  the  view  of  those  who  hold  the  words  "king 
of  Arad  "  in  Nam.  xxi.  1  to  be  an  erroneous  gloss.  The 
original  phrase  appears  to  bare  been  "  the  Canaanite  who 
dwelt  in  the  Kegeb  heard."  The  glossator  identified  this 
Hormah  with  the  Honnah  (Zephath)  of  Judges  i.  16  f.' 
But,  apart  from  the  other  considerations  (on  which  see 
the  commentaries),  Zephath  appears  to  lie  too  far  north 
to  fit  the  Pentateuchal  i 


Since  m;  work  on  the  Pentateuch  commenced,  the  pub- 
lication of  the  larger  Cambridge  Septuagiut  has  been  be- 
gun. The  contributions  it  has  made  to'  our  knowledge,  and 
my  increased  experience  of  the  textual  history,  make  it 
possible  to  revise  and  supplement,  and  often  to  corrob- 
orate, m;  earlier  work  in  remarkable  fashion.  This  is 
particularly  the  case  with  the  numbers  of  the  Israelites, 
and  I  am  happy  to  be  able  to  revert  to  the  discussion  of 
the  subject  on  pages  155-169  of  EPG.  It  is  now  possible 
to  see  the  causes  at  work  much  more  clearly  than  before. 

A.  On  page  166  of  EPC,  I  noted  that  "A  study  of  the 
variants  to  the  census  figures  collected  by  Kennicott  re- 
reals  the  fact  that  a  large  nnmber  of  readings  depend  npon 
the  undue  omission  or  insertion  of  the  Hebrew  word  for 
thousand,"  and  I  gave  illustrations.  There  is  striking  cor- 
rotK>ration  from  Greek  MSS.  The  most  extraordinary  of  these 
is  famished  by  HP  71.  Holmes  notes  that  it  is  written  a 
scriba  imperito,  qui  voces  et  cotnmata  sic  omittit,  ut  saepe 
numero  sensum  ipsum  confundat.  He  seems  to  have  had  be- 
fore bim  a  MS.  which  had  been  corrected,  and,  owing  to  his 
fortunate  lack  of  skill,  he  often  copies  the  corrections  in 
the  wrong  places,  thereby  showing  that  they  were  correc- 
tions. This  enables  us  to  argue  back  to  the  earlier  text. 
'If  this  !■  correct,  it  should  be  noted  tli&t,  as  tbe  phrase  occurs 
in  the  Samaritan,  that  recension  must  have  been  made  or  revised 
after  the  Hebrew  text  had  been  glossed  from  Judges.  I  imagine 
that  a  detailed  study  of  the  texts  would  also  show  that  the  Sti- 
marttan  is  taken  from  a  Hebrew  Pentat«ucb  written  in  the  square 
character;  but  I  have  never  exammed  this  point  closely. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


206  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

In  Num.  i.  21-43  be  regularly  misplaces  the  word  for 
thonsaDdK.  Thus  in  verse  21  we  get  ;^t\ia5n  wevraicoaiat 
TtiTcapaMVTa  c|,  which  cau  only  mean  546,000.  The  most 
notable  instance  is  the  case  of  Judah  (LXX  25=M.  T.  27), 
where  we  actually  find  reaaapt^  tat  ;^tXiaSc?  i0&o/ti)KovTa 
i^oKOfftai,  which  means  670,004.  In  xxvi.  7,  18  (LXX=M. 
T.  22)  and  31  (LXX=M.  T.  47),  we  get  similar  phe- 
nomena ;  and  in  xvi.  49  thia  MS.  presents  hrTaKotriat 
Sacaretrffapev  X*'^"^^-  [»tc]  =714,000.  The  explanation  ob- 
viously is  that  one  of  the  ancestors  of  71  laclied  the  thou- 
sands altogether.  A  corrector  inserted  the  words  margin- 
ally, and  they  were  frequently  taken  into  the  wrong  place. 
Thus,  according  to  the  original  reading  of  the  ancestor, 
the  nnmbers  of  the  Israelites  at  the  first  census  were: — 


Reuben 

546 

ManasBeh 

232 

Simeon 

369 

Benjamin 

435 

Jndah 

674 

Gad 

650 

Issachar 

454 

Dan 

7B2 

Zebulnn 

457 

Asher 

641 

Ephraim 

540 

Naphtali 

453 

(presumably  making  a  total  of  6,093),  and  the  tens  and 
units  have  been  multiplied  by  a  thousand  as  the  result  of 
this  process.  There  are  numerous  other  traces  in  the  Greelc 
MBS.  of  what  has  happened.  In  xxvi.  51,  M  has  the  mar- 
ginal note  ev  aXXoK  x^XiaSa  ^a^X',  "  in  other  copies  thou- 
sands 600,  1,  700,  30."  In  i.  37  (LXX=M.T.  25),  f  omits 
"thousands";  in  i.  31  (LXX3rM.T.  33),  where  K  84,  189, 
omit  "  thousands,"  d  misplaces  the  word ;  in  iii.  60  b 
has  65,000  and  300,  ir  have  5  and  60  and  300  thoa- 
sands,  w  has  5  and  60  and  thousands  and  300,  f  has  65,300 
[ir<VT<  KOI  e^KOirra  {-\-km  ir  w)  x'^*""'  (-|-«o*  bw)  Tp*a 
KOffiom  bw  fir] ;  in  xxvi.  27,  N  omits  "  thousands."  In 
the  last-named  chapter,  m  repeatedly  has  thousands  fol- 
lowed by  a  number  representing  all  the  digits  of  the  He- 
brew {e.g.  xt>JaS«  ^\0')  xxvi.  41  (LXX:i^M.  T.  37),  which 
can  only  mean  532,000.  Taken  in  conjunction  with  the 
Hebrew  variants  given  in  EPC,  these  facts  prove  that  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  207 

insertioB  of  the  thonsands  is  later  than  the  Greek  trans- 
lation. 

B.  Qreat  importance  attaches  to  the  readings  of  m  in 
Num.  ii.  It  omits  verses  13,  15,  19,  21,  23,  26,  30.  Through 
homceograpby  it  passes  from  'Aarip  in  verse  27  to  ^vXi^f 
in  verse  29;  so  that  we  cannot  tell  whether  its  original 
omitted  verse  28,  bat  we  may  preaome  that  this  was  so. 
In  verses  4,  6,  8,  11,  it  has  only  &vvafut  airov  without  apy 
nnmber.  In  verse  8  it  is  supported  by  the  Old  Latin.'  The 
meaning  of  these  facts  is  that  these  verses  were  originally 
lacking  iu  the  Greek.  In  four  places  the  initial  phrase  of 
these  verses  was  copied  into  the  ma^;in  of  one  of  m's  an- 
cestors, and  thence  got  into  the  text.  These  facts  throw 
some  light  on  the  history  of  the  chapter. 

C.  In  Num.  xxv.  9,  HP  71  reads  40  and  20  thousands. 
"  Thousands  "  is  misplaced  in  d  and  m.  I  venture  to  con- 
jecture that  originally  this  passage  had  either  40,  or  more 
probably  20,  as  the  total  Dumber,  as  was  so  frequently  the 
case  in  the  early  text  of  Judges.  A  variant,  the  introduc- 
tion of  "  thousands,"  and  the  necessary  reduction  of  40  to 
4  (so  easy  in  the  old  system  of  writing)  gave  our  present 
24,000.  Similarly,  in  ivi.  49  (Heb.  xviii.  14),  for  14,000, 
N  has  4,000;  HP  71  reads  seven  hundred,  ten,  four  thou- 
sands; and  d  has  thousands  ten,  four  and  seven  hundred. 
Here  I  would  suggest  that  onr  text  has  arisen  from  two 
old  readings  40  and  70.*  The  addition  of  10  and  the  other 
usual  enlargements  have  given  the  present  nnmber. 

D.  On  page  165  of  EPC,  importance  was  attached  to 
the  evidence  that  the  "  and  fifty  "  in  the  number  given  to 
Gad  in  the  first  census  was  late.  The  phrase  is  omitted 
In  i.  25  (LXX  37)  by  K  6,  107,  150,  gn  and  the  Georgian. 
It  may  now  be  added  that  the  word  "  and  "  is  lacking  in 
dp  and  m,  showing  that  the  50  was  inserted  as  a  correc- 
tion in  ancestors  of  those  M9S.    K  200  omits  the  number 

'  K  69  omits  ver.  8,  and  K  199  omiU  m.  28;  but  these  omlaelons 
lack  tbe  systematic  character  ot  m's  readings,  and  may  be  acci- 
dental (see  A.  C.  Clark,  op.  tit.,  pp.  4-6). 

*Cp.  Num.  xxxlU.  9,  where,  for  70  (palma),  m  baa  40  and  nb  no 
number;  and,  on  tbe  whole  subject,  see  BS,  Oct  1917,  pp.  6S9  ff. 
Vol.  UOCVr.    No.  802.    5 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


208  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Aprilf 

(6)  of  the  hundreds,  E  109  adds  "  and  fire,"  and  E  6  haa 
the  en  of  Vtn  {"and  aii")  over  an  eraaure.  From  these 
facts  it  was  concluded  that  six  and  five  were  alternative 
readings  for  the  number  of  hundreds,  and  that  five  waa 
inserted  in  the  margin  of  a  copy  that  read  six,  and  then 
taken  into  the  text  as  50.  There  are  further  traces  of  the 
process.  In  i.  46,  bw  dp  omit  the  "  and  "  before  50,  show- 
ing these  words  to  be  a  late  addition  to  the  total ;  in  ii.  16, 
N  dpt  fir  e"  again  omit  "  and  " ;  while  Boh'  joins  K  110, 
181,  in  omitting  the  whole  phrase;  in  ii.  16,  Bohl  Eth  f 
omit  the  whole  phrase,  and  dp  fl  m  and  e*  again  lack 
"and";  and  in  ii.  32  the  whole  expression  is  wanting  in 
E  84  and  Bohl ;  ^hile  B  F*  N  a,  m  dp  f  lack  "  and." 

There  are  other  instances  where  Oreek  and  Hebrew  au- 
thorities agree.  The  variations  presented  by  the  larger 
Cambridge  LXX  are  very  numerous.  It  is  impossible  to 
rely  on  the  numbers;  and,  in  view  of  the  hopelessness  of 
any  attempt  to  restore  the  original,  it  seems  to  me  use- 
less to  tarry  over  the  variations.  So  far  as  we  are  war- 
ranted in  making  a  guess,  we  may  conjecture  that  the 
original  reading  in  Ex.  xii.  37;  Num.  xi.  21  was  6,000, 

E.  In  Num.  xxxi.  the  facts  are  similar  to  those  in  other 
passages  we  have  considered.  For  instance,  in  verse  32  an 
Old  Latin  copy  has  675  instead  of  676,000  as  the  number 
of  the  oxen,  and  finds  much  support  in  the  readings  of 
other  Septuagintal  authorities.  It  would  be  as  tedious  as 
it  is  unnecessary  to  set  out  all  the  variationa  in  this  chap- 
ter. Suffice  it  to  say,  that  the  evidence  of  the  Insertion 
of  "  thousands "  is  overwhelming ;  whUe  in  verse  28,  for 
"  one  Boul  in  500,"  Laf  a>  r  have  "  one  soul  in  50." 

Earlier  the  text  speaks  of  thousands  of  Israelites.  I 
think  that  here  the  expression  ^^K  does  not  denote  "  thon- 
sand "  in  the  numerical  sense,  but  means  a  company  or 
unit  which  was  technically  so-called.  The  same  sense  ap- 
pears in  the  phrase  "  captains  of  thousands."  Similarly 
in  Josh.  viii.  (where  the  Septuagintal  text  as  a  whole  is 
immensely  superior  to  the  M.  T.)  I  should  read  "  three  chil- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  209 

iads  (companies)  of  men,"  with  pt,'  and  understand  the  3 
companies  of  vii.  4 1.,  who  were  repulsed  with  the  lose  of 
36  killed,  aa  three  small  units  in  no  wa;  approaching  a 
numerical  thoasand  each. 

VIII 

The  Samaritan  Pentateuch  often  shows  us  the  last  stages 
of  processes  that  have  affected  all  our  Bibles.  It  is  apt  to 
carT7  the  principles  which  are  responsible  for  so  many  of 
the  phenomena  of  our  Jewish  texts  just  one  step  further. 
Readers  of  this  Review  are  familiar  with  the  conception 
that  there  have  been  editorial  alterations  in  obedience  to 
supposed  Divine  commands  found  now  in  one  verse,  now 
in  another.  The  Samaritans  treated  Deut  xi.  24  aa  such 
a  command,  and  in  obedience  to  it  they  made  two  altera* 
tions.  By  comparing  these  with  the  Hebrew  originals  we 
are  able  to  see  clearly  how  the  principle  operated.  The 
first  passage  is  Gen.  z.  19. 

H.  T.  Sam. 

And  ttie  border  of  the  Caan-  And  the  border  of  tbe  Caan- 

anlte  was  from  Zldon,  as  thou  anite    was    from    the    River   of 

goest      towards      Oerar,      onto  Egypt  unto  the  great  River,  tbe 

Oaza;     as    Uiou    goest    towards  River  of   Euphrates,   and   unto 

Sodom  and  Oomorrah  and  Ad-  the  hinder  sea. 
mah  and  Zebollm,  nnto  Laaba. 

It  is  worth  lingering  a  minute  over  this.  We  note  that, 
while  the  original  cannot  have  been  later  than  the  time 
of  Abraham  in  its  first  comiwsition,  seeing  that  it  treats 
Sodom,  etc.,  as  still  existing,  the  Samaritan  alteration 
brings  a  new  version  into  existence  well  over  one  thousand 
years  later.  The  scholarly  ideals  implied  are  at  the  oppo- 
site pole  from  those  of  the  modem  West.  We  are  all  ani- 
mated by  the  historical  spirit;  the  alteration  is  not  merdj 
unhistorical,  it  is  anti-historical.  We  regard  it  as  our 
first  duty  to  preserve  as  far  as  possible  the  ipsiasima  ©erfto 
of  an  old  author;  these  old  editors  were  ruthless  in  de- 

■  Terse  S.  The  pre-Hexaplar  IXX.  lacked  the  E.OOO  men  of  the 
UasBoretlc  verse  12. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


210  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [^pi'lt 

stroying  them,  caring  only  to  obey  what  they  cODCeived  to 
be  the  word  of  God.  We  strive  to  exercise  the  minutest 
care  in  coUecting  and  weighing  the  evidence  and  interpret- 
ing it  in  the  most  scientific  spirit:  they  gave  no  thought  to 
the  evidence,  knew  nothing  of  any  scientific  method,  and 
were  indifferent  to  all  considerations  except  their  own 
erroneous  interpretation  of  the  Law.  We  may  weU  ask 
what  the  docum^itary  critics  would  have  made  of  this 
passage,  had  they  worked  on  the  Samaritan  with  no  knowl- 
edge of  any  other  text.  What  would  have  been  their  infer- 
ences as  to  source,  date,  historical  character,  and  textual 
history?  Does  not  this  verse  show  that  the  whole  of  their 
method  is  misconceived? 

The  second  alteration  is  found  in  Dent,  xxxiv.  1  fl. : — 
H.  T.  Sam. 

And  the  Lord  ataowed  talm  all  And    tl)«    Lord    showed    him 

the  land  of  GUead,  unto  Dan;       all  the  land  from  the  river  of 
and  all  Naphtall,  and  the  land      EgyDt    tmto    the    great    River, 
of  Bpbralm  and  Manasseh,  and      the  River  Euphrates,  and  unto 
all  the  land  of  Judah,  unto  the      the  hinder  sea. 
binder  sea;  and  the  South,  and 
the  Plain  of  the  valley  of  Jk- 
Icho  the  dtr  of  palm  trees,  unto 
Zoar. 

Once  more  we  see  the  total  disregard  for  historical  truth 
or  physical  probability.  Surely  we  can  desire  no  finer 
Ulustrations  of  the  method. 

It  is  one  of  the  objects  of  the  present  writer's  work  to 
reverse  this  process  wherever  he  finds  it  possible.  In  bis 
experience  the  truth  does  not  come  all  at  once,  and  it  is 
only  gradually  that  he  detects  the  mutilations  and  is  en- 
abled to  suggest  the  remedies.  A  number  of  changes  seem 
to  have  been  due  to  the  use  of  the  word  "  baalim  "  for  the 
burgesses  or  elders  of  the  city  who  sat  at  the  gate  and  ad- 
ministered judgment.  The  indications  of  the  change  are 
slight  but  sufBcient,  and  they  are  assisted  by  the  fact  that 
differ^t  methods  were  employed  in  altering  certain  verses 
of  Deuteronomy  and  Exodus.  In  the  first-named  book  the 
editors  operated  by  excisions.    This  was  impossible  in  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  211 

other  case,  and  hence  we  have  nonsensical  snbstitations. 
To  the  gate  the  master  brought  his  pjirchased  Hebrew 
slave  who,  after  six  years,  desired  to  extend  his  service 
ander  the  provisions  of  Ex.  xxi.  2-6;  Deut.  zv.  12-18.^ 

"What  happens?  The  slave  publiclj,  in  the  presence 
of  the  very  judges  who  would  have  to  try  the  question  of 
fact  should  any  dispute  hereafter  arise,  submits  to  having 
an  indelible  mark,  which  will  always  be  evidence  in  case 
of  any  dispute,  made  on  that  part  of  his  body  where  it 
will  do  least  harm.  If  he  should  hereafter  say,  '  True,  I 
have  this  mark,  but  it  was  made  without  my  consent,'  the 
knowledge  of  the  judges  will  decide  the  issue.  If  aU  the 
judges  be  dead,  yet,  as  the  ceremony  was  public,  there  will 
be  the  maximum  probabUity  that  some  witness  of  it  will 
survive  who  can  prove  what  he  saw.  The  cerranony  may 
of  course  also  have  some  archaeological  or  symbolical  mean- 
ing, but  it  is  iraposeible  to  feel  any  doubt  as  to  its  legal 
and  practical  aspects.  It  is  in  accordance  with  all  we 
know  of  the  ceremonies  of  ancient  law  before  the  intro- 
duction of  the  properly  authenticated  writing,  which,  in 
a  more  mature  system,  provides  the  necensary  evidence.  In 
all  ancient  systems  of  law  we  find  the  same  need  for 
evidence  giving  rise  to  the  same  publicity,  (or  the  question 
of  proof  has  to  be  faced  in  every  age.  The  Pentateuch 
knows  nothing  of  written  documents  properly  witnessed 
and  authenticated  by  the  signatures  or  seals  of  all  the 
parties  to  the  transaction.  Writing  it  knows  —  we  meet 
with  it  in  the  Deuteronomic  law  of  divorce  and  in  some 
of  the  covenant  ceremonies.  But  in  those  very  covenant 
ceremonies  it  is  a  mere  adjunct  to  the  ceremonies  that  we 
see  in  covenants  which  have  no  writing,  and  in  no  case  is 
the  writing  authenticated  as  it  would  be  in  any  mature 
system  of  law.  The  Israel  of  the  Pentateuch  has  yet  to 
pass  throu^  long  ages  of  development  before  its  law  can 
embody  the  ideas  which  give  rise  to  the  Egyptian  legal 
documents  of  the  year  2500  b.c,  the  Babylonian  legal  tab- 
■  sir  J.  O.  Frazer  does  not  appear  to  me  to  bit  the  nail  on  tbe 
head  In  bis  long  and  rambling  dlacusalon  o(  tbla  ceremonr  (Folk- 
lore Is  the  Old  Testament  [1918],  vol.  111.  pp.  165-269). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


212  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [ApfUj 

lets,  the  cODvejance  of  the  thirty-second  chapter  of  Jere- 
miah, or  the  modem  Eogliah  deed"  (SBL,  pp.  26 f.). 

Unfortonately  the  origiDal  laws  spoke  of  the  judges  as 
the  baalim,  or  possibly  the  baalim  of  the  place  or  of  the 
city.  Hence,  in  Ex.  xzi.  6,  Q'ri^n  Jia-elohim,  the  gods,  was 
substitnted.  Jerome  still  knew  that  the  word  had  a  plural 
meaning,  for  be  renders  dtw.  In  Deuteronomy,  on  the 
other  hand,  the  whole  phrase,  "  and  thoa  shalt  bring  him 
to  the  baalim,"  was  simply  cat  out,  and  Terse  17  b^ins 
"  and  thou  shalt  take,"  etc.,  without  any  indication  of  the 
locwi  in  quo.  These  changes  are  responsible  for  the  ab- 
surd plight  of  the  documentary  theorists  who  render 
"  God  "  in  Ex.  xxi.  6. 

"  The  critics,  having  obtained  the  curious  phrase  '  go  to 
Gtod  '  —  a  phrase  better  suited  to  idolaters  than  to  the  God 
of  the  Decalogue  or  a  law-giver  who  worshipped  Him  — 
promptly  substitute  '  the  sanctuary '  for  '  God.'  But  the 
change  is  fatal.  It  is  true  that  we  meet  with  a  number  of 
erections  which  the  critics  term  '  sanctuaries,'  but  what 
were  these  sanctuaries?  Not  buildings,  but  altars  —  that  is, 
structures,  which,  whatever  their  merits  as  places  of  wor- 
ship, would  not  possess  the  one  essential  for  this  ceremony, 
a  door  or  door-post.  And  what  a  curious  transaction  it 
is !  A  '  sanctuary '  we  have,  but  no  priest,  no  congregation, 
no  sacriflce,  no  ceremony,  religious  or  other,  merely  this 
pinning  of  the  slave's  ear  to  the  imaginary  door  or  door- 
post. Is  there  any  parallel  to  this  in  the  legislation  of 
the  Pentateuch?  And  could  this  extraordinary  proceeding 
serve  any  useful  purpose?"   (SBL,  p.  26).' 

The  same  substitution  has  been  made  in  Ex.  xxii.  7,  8 
(E-V.,  8,  9) ,  and  Jerome  has  ad  deoa.  In  the  last-mentioned 
verse  he  renders  ai  illi  judicaverint.  The  Massoretic  text, 
too,  still  retains  the  plural  verb  necessitated  by  baalim; 
but  the  Samaritan,  as  in  other  cases  where  there  Is  evi- 
dence of  a  damaged  text,  has  smoothed  it  away.* 

1  On  other  equally  ridiculous  attempts  to  explain  the  plirase.  see 
BS,  Jan.  190S.  pp.  108  f. 

'See  e.g.  the  removal  of  the  article  before  Hormata  In  Num. 
Zlv.  45. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  .  213 

Od  the  other  hand,  Deuteronomy  presents  at  least  one 
more  instance  of  the  excision  of  the  objectionable  word. 
"  If  there  be  a  controversy  between  men,  and  they  come 
into  judgment"  (in  xxr.  1),  is  followed  by  a  number  of 
plural  verbs  of  which  the  subject  is  lacking.  Of  course 
we  should  read  "and  the  baalim  judge  them,"  etc.  The 
removal  of  the  word  has  led  to  great  trouble  in  verses  2 1. ; 
but  it  will  be  se^i  that,  with  the  restoration,  B  gives  al> 
most  the  original  text: — 

M.  T.  B 

And  It  shall  be,  U  the  wicked         And  It  shaU  be  ("  and  "  only 
man   be    worthy   fa)   be   beaten,      m,    Boti,    Bt^,    C7r-ed)    If    the 
that  the  Jndge  sball  c&use  htm      wicked    man   be   worthy    to   be 
to  Ue  down,  and  to  be  beaten      beaten,    thou    thalt    cauae    him 
before    his    face,    according    to      to   lie   down  before   them,  and 
hlB     wlckedncBB,     by     number.      tHey  shall  give  him  10  atrtpea 
Forty  stripes  he  may  give  blm,      by  numbu",   tA«v  shall  not  ex> 
he  shall  not  exceed:  lest,  If  be     oeed:  but  If  tliou  exceed,  etc' 
should    exceed,    and    beat    him 
above  tliese  with  many  stripes, 
then  thy  brother  should  seem 
Tile  unto  thee. 

It  is  of  course  possible  that,  in  other  passages  of  Deu- 
teronomy, "  elders  "  stand  for  an  earlier  "  baalim  " ;  but 
I  have  met  with  no  sufficient  evidence  of  this.' 

'Incidentally  we  may  note  how  the  text  has  grown  through 
glossing,  "  according  to  hie  wickedness "  being  shown  by  B  to  be 
an  interpretation  and  to  have  led  to  a  duplication  of  the  verb 
"  beat" 

'  In  Deut.  xxi.  20,  where  M.  T.  ha«  "  elders,"  and  LXX  and  Sam. 
"  men,"  there  Is  a  curious  piece  of  evidence  to  show  that  the  com- 
plete phrases  "  unto  tbe  elders  (men)  of  the  city  "  are  altematlre 
glosses.  K  109  has^M  32.  Clearly  the  pbraae  bad  been  marginally 
Inserted  In  Its  original,  and  the  scribe  began  to  copy  i];n  before 
he  observed  that  he  was  to  take  In  the  additional  words  at  this 
point.  (Incidentally  this  throws  further  light  on  the  antecedents 
and  Importance  of  K  109.  Its  original  lacked  the  thousands  In 
the  census  lists,  and  It  often  has  valuable  and  important  readings 
[see  DPC.  pp.  166f.;  BS,  Oct.  1914,  pp.  647 f.]). 

In  the  previous  verse  "  to  the  elders  of  his  city  and  to  the  gate 
of  his  place  "  is  clearly  not  original.  K  181  and  all  tbe  Septuagln- 
tal  authorities,  except  B  I^t,  omit  "and."  Doubtless  we  should  read 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


214  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

1  now  come  to  a  vitally  iiiiportant  matter  —  the  light 
thrown  by  textual  criticism  oa  the  legal  provisionB  as  to 
the  places  and  kinds  of  sacrifice.  It  may  be  remembered 
that  I  dealt  with  this  very  fully  in  my  pre-textaal  days 
in  the  sixth  chapter  of  EFC.  The  present  discussion  doe9 
not  replace  that.  Nor  could  anybody  deal  adequately  with 
my  views  unless  he  gave  careful  study  to  the  whole  of 
that  chapter  as  well  as  to  the  present  obserrations.  For 
the  moment  I  will  merely  recall  the  fact  that  I  distiD^ish 
between  three  kinds  of  offering;  those  made  on  behalf  of 
the  whole  nation  (statutory  national),  those  offered  by 
laymen  at  cairn  altars  under  the  provisions  of  Ex.  xx. 
24-26  (customary  individual),  and  those  instituted  by  the 
Pentateuch  for  individuals  to  bring  to  the  House  of  the 
Lord  (statutory  individual),  i.e.  the  "holy  things  and  free- 
will offerings  "  of  Deut.  xii.  26.' 

As  we  have  seen,  the  Samaritan  Fentatench  in  many 
matters  represents  the  latest  stage  of  all  in  the  operation 
of  ideas  which  influenced  the  Jewish  custodians  of  the 
text.  An  extraordinarily  significant  instance  is  presented 
by  Ex.  xz.  24 :  "an  altar  of  earth  thou  mayest  make  unto 
me,  and  thou  mayest  sacrifice  on  it  thy  burnt-offerings  and 
thy  peace-offerings."  Then  the  texts  diverge: — 
H.  T.  Sam. 

Dipon  i>33  ^^p3  nto  -[ixt  ntt       'rrattt  t;*k  Dipon  -pp^Di  -[mio 
•oe-  nn  Tarn  ick  tod  'dp  n« 

Thy  sheep  and  thliie  oxen  In  Of    thj    sheep    and    of    thine 

all  tbe  place  where  I  cause  my  oxen  In  (he  place  where  I  have 
name  to  be  remembered.  cauied  my  name  to  be  remem- 

bered. 
Then  both  continue,  "  I  will  come  unto  thee  and  I  will 
bless  thee."    "  Of  thy  flock  and  of  thy  cattle  "  comes  from 
the  present  form  of  Deut  xii.  21. 

mjrrn,  aa  in  xzll.  IG;  xxr.  T.  It  may  be  that  tble  la  only  the  last 
stage  la  the  blatorr  ot  the  verse,  and  that  originally  it  (and  ether 
verses)  presented  "  to  the  baallm  gt  the  place  to  the  gate  ":  but 
there  la  no  evidence  to  support  this  Idea,  and,  as  at  pres^it  ad- 
vised, I  see  no  sufflclrat  ground  lor  accepting  it 

>  See  the  tatde  on  p.  20ft  of  EIPC:  Reeve's  article  "  Sacrifice  OT  " 
InlSBB. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  215 

Thaa  the  law  of  Exodus  which  in  the  Massoretic  form 
permits  any  nnmber  of  lay  altars  in  Israelite  territory/ 
is  changed  by  the  Samaritans  into  a  law  that  permits  sac- 
riflcial  worship  at  only  one  spot  in  the  whole  world.  That 
change  presapposes  two  things:  (1)  that  non-sacrificial 
slaughter  without  the  use  of  any  altar  at  all  is  well  es- 
tablished; and  (2)  that  either  the  legislation  is  given  for 
a  comnmnity  so  small  and  concentrated  that  all  its  mem- 
bers can  worship  St  a  single  spot,  and  so  sedentary  that 
they  can  reasonably  be  expected  never  to  travel,  or  else 
that  non-saerificial  joint  public  worship  (i.e.  the  insti- 
tution of  the  synagogue)  has  already  been  brought  into 
existence,  and  suffices  for  the  ordinary  needs  of  the  com- 
munity's religious  life. 

It  is  impossible  to  exaggerate  the  importance  of  this  last 
point.  In  days  when  all  joint  public  worship  was  sacri- 
ficial, local  concentration  of  sacrifice  was  unthinkable  ex- 
cept for  a  community  like  the  Israel  of  the  desert.  We  are 
80  used  to  the  joint  public  service  of  prayer  that  we  find 
it  hard  to  realize  the  conditions  that  preceded  the  inven- 
tion of  the  synagogue ;  but,  once,  they  are  grasped,  it  will 
be  seen  that  it  was  simply  inconceivable  that  any  relig- 
ious legislation  should  have  attempted  to  abolish  local  sac- 
rifice, i.e.  the  only  acts  of  worship  ever  attended  by  the 

■ "  In  oil  the  place,"  not  elsewhere.  Thus  Bacrlficlal  worship  could 
only  be  oftered  on  laraelltleh  soil.  Hence  Naaman'B  request  for 
"two  mules'  burden  of  earth"  (2  Kings  t.  IT),  which,  by  a  legal 
fiction,  would  possess  religious  extraterrltorlalltr,  even  when  phys- 
ically situate  In  Damascus  (see  especially  EPC,  pp.  220-226). 

The  Syrlac  reads  "  In  everv  place  (jCDpO  ^33)  where  tftou  shalt 
cause  my  name  to  be  remembered"  In  Ex.  xz.  24.  It  this  Is  cor- 
rect, the  Hebrew  represents  the  first  attempt  to  convert  the  pas- 
sage from  a.  law  sanctioning  a  plurality  of  lay  altars  Into  an 
enactment  of  an  exclusive,  place  of  Ba«rlflce.  Note  the  textual 
impllcaUons:  (1)  It  would  strikingly  confirm  the  view  (BS,  Jan. 
1915,  pp.  92  tt.,  123)  tbat  the  Hebrew  and  Samaritan  represent  ths 
text  of  the  Jerusalem  Temple.  (2)  It  would  show  the  relative 
lateness  of  the  alterations  In  the  Divine  appellations  which  appear 
to  rest  on  the  Massoretic  form  of  the  verse  (cp.  BS,  Jan.  1916,  p. 
Its,  with  April,  191E,  pp.  324  ff.).  K  199  and  U£X  also  read  "In 
every  place." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


216  BibUotheca  Sacra  [April, 

overwhelming  majority  of  the  women  and  children  or 
(except  at  the  three  annual  pilgrimages)  by  the  males  of 
all  localities  except  the  capital. 

I  am  going  to  suggest  that  the  Samaritan  alteration  of 
Ex.  zx.  24-26  was  preceded  by  a  Jerasalem  Temple  alter- 
ation of  Deut.  xii.,  —  a  chapter  which,  in  its  original  form, 
1  hold  to  have  been  the  basis  for  the  conduct  of  the  prefix- 
Uic  religious  leaders  of  the  people  in  the  matter  of  sacri- 
fice. But  1  most  first  clear  away  minor  points  on  other 
chapters. 

In  Deut.  xiv.  26,  for  "  thine  houBehold "  (in>3)  B  Arm 
Sah  read  "  thy  son  "  jClJa)- 

In  XT.  20,  for  "  thine  household,"  HP  71  has  "  thy  sons  " 

In  xvi.  11,  M.  T.  has  "  and  thou  shalt  rejoice  before  the 
Lord  thy  Ood,  thou,  and  thy  son,  and  thy  daughter,  and 
thy  manservant,  and  thy  maidservant,  and  the  Levite  that 
is  within  thy  gates,  and  the  stranger,  and  the  fatherless, 
and  the  widow,  that  are  in  the  midst  of  thee,  in  the  place 
which  the  Lord  thy  Ood  shall  choose  to  cause  his  name  to 
dwell  there";  but  m  and  bw  omit  "  in  the  place  which  the 
Lord  thy  God  shall  choose  to  cause  his  name  to  dwell 
there,"  m  also  omitting  the  words  "  that  are  in  the  midst 
of  thee." 

In  xri.  15,  d  omits  the  words  "  seven  days  shalt  thon 
Keep  a  feast  onto  the  Lord  thy  God  in  the  place  which  the 
Lord  shall  cbooBC." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  in  all  these  cases  the  Mas- 
soretic  text  is  wrong,  and  the  variants  are  right ;  for  in  the 
following  verse  it  is  expressly  said :  "  three  times  in  a  year 
shall  all  thy  males  appear,"  etc.  Obviously  the  lawgiver 
had  not  the  faintest  intention  of  including  women  and 
children  in  the  compulsory  pilgrimages.  Note,  too,  that 
in  verse  8  the  remaining  days  of  the  feast  are  celebrated 
after  the  return  of  the  pilgrims  (ver.  7).  So  far  as  the 
women  and  children  of  the  population  residing  outside  the 
capital  were  concerned,  the  festivals  could,  in  the  contem- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  217 

plation  of  the  lawgiver,  Dormall;  be  celebrated  at  borne.* 
This  then  bringe  ub  to  Dent.  xil. 

Two  riews  of  that  chapter  are  current :  ( 1 )  it  is 
Mosaic  aa  it  stands,  (2)  it  is  post-Mosaic,  and  made  dod- 
sacriflcial  slaughter  lawful  for  the  first  time.  To  these  I 
oppose  the  view  that  (3)  it  is  Mosaic,  but  has  suffered  in 
transmission.  The  reference  to  Ex.  xx.  24  in  Dent.  xii.  21 
has  been  mutilated.  In  its  original  form  the  last-named 
verse  justified  the  sacrifices  of  Saol  and  Samuel  and  all 
other  customary  sacrifices  iu  Palestine  in  cases  where  the 
central  sanctuary  was  too  distant. 

The  first  view  suffers  from  this  dilemma:  Either  Dent 
xii.  contradicts  Ex.  xx.  24,  and  is  in  turn  contradicted  by 
the  practices  and  views  of  an  Elijah  (1  Kings  xviii.)  and 
an  Elisha  (2  Kings  v.  17  ff.),  even  after  the  construction 
of  Bolomon's  Temple,  in  addition  to  being  impracticable 
and  inconceivable  in  an  age  when  all  public  worship  was 
sacrificial,  or  else  it  recognizes  and  qnotes  the  earlier 
law,  but  in  a  barely  intelligible  form.  After  what  we  have 
learnt  of  the  transmission  of  the  Pentateuch,  the  impartial 
reader  will  probably  agree  that  damage  to  the  text  is  more 
likely. 

On  the  second  hypothesis  the  law  of  Deuteronomy  de- 
liberately contradicts  Exodus,  and  was  unknown  till  the 
time  of  Josiah.  This  is  impossible  for  these  reasons : — 

(a)  The  words  in  Deut.  xii.  21  ■  ■  ■  13»«w» -ppao  "nan 
TniX  "itPM  "  and  thon  mayest  sacrifice  [or  slaughter  —  the 
same  word  as  in  Ex.  xx.  24]  of  thine  oxen  and  of  thy  aheep 
.  .  .  as  I  commanded  thee  "  are  a  direct  reference  to  the 
earlier  text.  The  command  is  not  to  be  found  elsewhere. 
It  is  quite  inconceivable  that  a  legislator  who  wished  to 
repeal  an  existing  law  should  quote  and  confirm  it. 

(b)  As  I  have  so  often  pointed  out,  non-sacrificial 
slaughter  is  common  before  the  time  of  Josiab   (see  &g. 

'  Elkanah  appears  to  have  been  usually  accompanied  by  his  wives 
BM  well  as  hlB  Bona  (1  Sam.  1.  4).  The  U.  T.  Introduced  dau^ters 
here  too,  but  they  were  unknown  to  B.  In  the  case  of  tlie  wives 
the  pilgrimage  waa  optional  (ver.  22). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


218  Bibliotheca  8acra  [April, 

EPC,  pp.  175-178).  It  may  be  added  that  Hob.  ix.  4,  while 
teztnally  doubtful,  probably  Implies  that  mourners,  i.e. 
people  unclean  by  reason  of  contact  with  the  dead,  coold 
and  did  eat  food  in  the  manner  provided  by  Deut.  xii.  21 1 
For  remember,  it  is  a  cardinal  point  of  the  Wellhansen 
theory  that  the  unsacriflcial  eating  of  meat  was  first  intpo- 
dnced  in  Josiah's  time  by  the  then  recently  composed  Book 
of  Deuteronomy.  If  the  facts  prove  that  non-sacrificial 
slaughter  is  earlier,  the  whole  theory  falls.^  I  do  not  know 
whether  he  supposed  the  Israelites  in  Egypt  to  have  been 
vegetarians  for  the  space  of  430  years  {see  Gen.  xliii.  16) ! 
It  is  certain  that  they  did  not  sacrifice  (Ex.  viii.  22,  E. 
V.  26). 

(c)  Sanl  clearly  knew  of  some  laws  permitting  the 
eating  of  meat  killed  at  a  cairn  altar,  but  forbidding  the 
consumption  of  the  blood  (1  Sam.  xiv.  32-35).  No  such 
prohibition  occurs  in  any  portion  of  the  Pentateuch  as- 
signed  by  the  documentary  theorists  to  an  earlier  date 
than  Deuteronomy,  but  it  does  occur  in  Deut.  xii.  23. 

(d)  As  already  indicated,  it  is  quite  inconceivable  that 
a  religions  legislator  who  Iwd  in  vieio  the  difficultiea  of 
distance  ("  if  the  place  be  too  far  for  thee,"  ver.  21)  should 
have  enacted  that,  with  the  exception  of  the  inhabitants 
of  the  capital,  no  woman  or  child  need  partake  in  any  act 
of  joint  worship;  and  that,  in  practice,  all  men  (with  the 
like  exception)  should  attend  such  worship  only  three 
tiroes  in  each  year. 

(e)  The  original  text  of  Deut.  xvi.  manifestly  does  con- 
template local  rejoicings  before  the  Lord  in  which  women 
and  others  participated. 

What  the  first  text  of  Dent,  xvi.  21  was  we  cannot  say. 
The  Samaritan  travels  a  stage  further  on  the  road  of  cor- 
ruption. It  alters  "  shall  choose "  into  "  has  chosen  "  in 
verses  5,  11,  14,  18,  21,  26,  in  accordance  with  its  usual 
method  of  representing  Mount  Gerizim  as  the  sole  place 
of  lawful  sacrifice  enjoined  by  God.  It  also  changes  '*  to 
■  I  leave  out  of  couBlderaUon  Deut  zli.  16 1,  because  maajr  crit- 
ics plausiblr  reject  these  verses  aa  a  Kloseator's  addition. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Composition  of  the  Pentateuch  219 

Bet  his  name  "  («»  Qic?^)  in  verse  21  into  "  to  make  his 
name  dwell "  ter  n«  pe6).  This  reading  may  be  of  Im- 
portance as  illustrating  the  tendency  to  revise  the  text  in 
the  light  of  Jewish  mystical  ideas,*  but  does  not  help  the 
present  inquiry. 

The  LXX  BtUl  contains  a  delicate  indication  of  the  point 
at  which  the  mutilation  occurred.  It  is  noticeable  that  for 
the  consecutive  nmn  we  here  find  koi  Svfftit,  "  and  thou 
Shalt  sacrifice."  This  is  certainly  not  the  invariable  prac- 
tice of  the  Greek  translators  of  the  Pentateuch,  where  the 
perfect  consecutive  occurs  in  an  apodosis.'  It  seems,  there- 
fore, that  the  excision  occurred  just  before  this  word,  and 
that  the  Greek  "  and  "  was  left  standing.* 

The  most  probable  view  of  the  matter  is  that  the  apodo- 
sis  contained  at  least  the  words  "thou  mayest  offer  up 
thy  burnt-offerings  and  thy  peace-offerings,"  possibly  also 
some  such  phrase  as  "  on  an  altar  of  earth  or  unhewn 
stones  "  immediately  in  front  of  nnan.  These  were  cut  out 
in  the  interests  of  the  Jerusalem  temple  after  the  service 
of  the  synagogue  had  superseded  local  lay  sacrifice,  which 
had  been  killed  by  the  Exile.  The  language  of  verses  13  f. 
would  help  to  bring  about  the  change  in  an  unhistorical 
age,  and  a  polemical  motive  directed  against  other  sanctu- 
aries, such  as  the  Elephantine  temple  or  the  temple  of 
Onias,  may  have  provided  the  inspiration.  In  this  connec- 
tion it  must  be  remembered  that  Isa,  xix.  18  "  city  of 
righteousness,"  which  is  preserved  by  the  LXX,  has  been 
altered  into  "  city  of  desolation  "  through  hostility  to  the 
temple  of  Onias.  I  conjecture,  therefore,  that  the  first 
text  of  the  passage  ran  somewhat  as  follows : — 

■  S«e  BS,  April,  191S,  pp.  261  f.  IncldenUlIr  It  may  be  noted 
tbat  the  Samaritana  Introduced  nx,  wlilcta  was  not  In  the  earlier 
text 

'See  tbe  renderings  In  Oen.  xll.  12;  xvlU.  26;  xxlr.  8,  41  (text 
of  D  bw,  m,  p.  Arm,  Bth,  Boh:  the  others  insert    m);      xxxll.  ft; 
Ex.  ZTlii.  16;  Num.  xzx.  16  (text  of  Arm,  Eth,  Lat:  the  others  in- 
sert ««. 
■  &t  ewmt  for  eiwui  appears  to  be  a  mere  copyist's  error. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


^0  Bibliotheca  Boon 

"It  the  place  which  the  Lord  thy  God  ehall  choose  to 
Bet  his  name  there  be  too  far  for  thee,  thou  mayest  offer 
up  thy  bamt-offeringa  aod  thy  peace-offerings  [?  on  an 
altar  of  earth  or  nnhewn  stones]  and  sacrifice  [slaughter] 
of  thine  oxen  and  of  thy  sheep  as  I  commanded  thee,  and 
eat  flesh  in  thy  gates  according  to  all  the  desire  of  thy 
soul." 

It  this  be  the  tme  account  of  the  matter,  it  vill  be  seen 
that  the  whole  body  of  the  historical  instance  of  lay  aac- 
riflce  is  as  much  in  accordance  with  the  original  text  of 
Deuteronomy  as  are  the  cases  of  non-sacriflcial  slaughter 
with  the  extant  copies  of  the  book.' 

'  This  InTeetigatlon  has  now  reached  a  point  at  which  It  becomea 
necessaiT  to  consider  the  religion  of  Moses.  It  Is  hoped,  therefore, 
to  devote  the  next  iirticle  to  a  Btudy  of  his  lalth,  and  to  reenme 
this  series  UAet. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


JOSIFH   D.    WILBON,   D.D. 
PHILADBLPHIA,   PINNSTLTANU 

"Beginning  from  Moses  and  from  all  the  prophets,  he 
interpreted  to  them  in  all  the  scriptares  the  things  con- 
cerning himself  (Lnke  xziv.  27,  B.  V.)- 

Fbom  the  prophets  our  Lord  could  gather  much  concero- 
ing  Himself;  but  bov  from  Hoses,  i.e.  the  Pentateuch? 
Moses  had  indeed  foretold,  "A  prophet  shall  the  Lord  your 
Ood  raise  up  onto  you  like  onto  me."  This  does  refer  to 
the  Christ,  but  a  perverse  ingenuity  will  have  it  that  some 
other  prophet  or  a  line  of  prophets  must  have  been  de- 
signed. Nevertheless,  there  is  abundant  reference  to  the 
world's  Bedeemer  in  the  boobs  of  Moses.  It  is  in  the  word 
"  Jehovah." 

In  John  xii.  41  it  is  written,  "  These  things  said  Isaiah, 
because  he  saw  his  [Christ's]  glory ;  and  he  spake  of  him." 
In  Isa.  vi.  we  have  the  record.  It  was  in  the  temple.  The 
seraphim  hovered  about  Him  and  cried,  "  Holy,  holy,  holy, 
is  Jehovah  of  hosts."  The  doorposts  of  the  temple  trem- 
bled. "  Woe  is  me,"  said  Isaiah.  "  I  am  undone ;  ■  .  ■  for 
mine  eyes  have  seen  the  King,  Jehovah  of  hosts."  Jehovah 
of  the  Old  Testament  became  incarnate  in  Jesus  of  Naza- 
reth, at  once  human  and  divine.  Jeremiah  (xziii.  S,  6) 
writes,  "  The  days  come,  saith  Jehovah,  that  I  will  raise 
onto  David  a  righteous  Branch,"  —  a  human  being,  a  de- 
scendant of  David,  — "  and  this  is  his  name  whereby  he 
shall  be  called :  Jehovah  our  righteousness."  It  is  not  prob- 
able that  the  prophets  understood  this  mystery  —  God  man- 
ifest in  the  flesh,  suffering  as  a  human  being,  and  glorified. 
SI  Peter  refers  to  their  eager  search  (1  Pet  i.  10,  11)  as 
If  the  fullness  of  the  truth  was  not  revealed  until  Christ 
came.  Still,  it  Is  written  in  Moses  and  the  prophets;  and 
this  paper  is  a  search  for  the  world's  Bedeemer  in  the  Pen- 
tateuch. 

Jehovah  appears  in  the  Old  Testament  as  God  in  Be- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


222  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

demption.  The  name  does  not  occur  in  Gen.  i.  There 
Elohim,  the  Creator  and  Baler  ot  heaven  and  earth,  is 
mentioned.  Then,  there  was  no  sin  and  no  need  of  redemp- 
tion ;  but  as  soon  as  the  histor?  of  man  ie  taken  up,  the 
significant  term  appears.  For  man  was  a  faUnre.  He  did 
not  accomplish  the  design  of  his  creation.  He  was  made 
a  little  lower  than  God,  Elohim  (Ps.  viii.  6).  What  he 
would  have  become  had  he  maintained  his  integrity  we 
can  only  conjecture.  What  he  will  become  throagh  Be- 
demption  we  learn  through  the  gospel,  and  the  gospel  was 
announced  at  once  upon  the  fall.  Man  had  been  the  link 
between  earth  and  heaven.  The  highest  of  created  beings 
on  earth,  he  was  made  in  the  divine  image.  With  him  there 
entered  a  moral  kingdom.  Without  a  moral  kingdom,  with 
mankind  only  intellectual  brutes,  this  world  were  an  im- 
perfect world.  The  crown  was  placed  upon  creation,  and 
earth  was  lifted  heavenward,  when  the  godlike  quality  of 
choosing  the  right  was  introduced.  It  was  a  risk,  for  man 
might  choose  the  wrong.  Are  we  glad  the  risk  was  taken? 
With  all  the  danger  would  we  not  say, 

"Sinless  the  cattle  muncli  tbelr  eoni. 

But  I  would  be  &  man. 

I  serve  because  I  will,  and  not 

Because  I  must"? 

gome  would  say  that,  man  having  failed,  the  race  should 
have  been  extirpated  and  a  new  race  started.  Some  of  the 
rabbins  conjectured  that  that  was  done,  and  that  God's 
eternal  years  were  marked  with  wrecks  of  races  like  our 
own  on  whom  the  experiment  was  tried.  We  know  noth- 
ing of  any  such  experiment ;  but  we  do  know  that,  with  the 
lapse  from  innocence,  came  the  promise.  The  Seed  of  the 
woman  shall  bmise  the  serpent's  head  (Gen.  lit  15). 

This  brings  ua  to  the  first  recorded  use  of  the  word  *'  Je- 
hovah.'' "I  have  gotten  a  man,  Jehovah"  (Gen.  iv.  1)  — 
the  word  occurs  in  Gen.  ii.  and  iii.,  but  that  is  the  work 
of  the  historian,  Moses,  —  Eve  utters  her  joyful  exclama- 
tion upon  the  birth  of  Cain.  What  did  she  mean?  The 
A.  V.  translators  inferred,  very  properly,  that  Eve  conld 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Jehovah  223 

not  have  supposed  she  had  given  birth  to  Ood,  and  so 
they  introduc-ed  the  word  "  from."  The  K.  V.  translators, 
knowing  that  there  was  no  such  word  as  "  from,"  intro- 
duced "with  the  help  of"  (in  italics).  But  neither  from, 
nor  tcith,  nor  any  other  preposition,  is  in  the  text.  "  Jeho- 
vah "  is  in  apposition  with  "  man."  The  mark  before  it 
is  the  Hebrew  eth,  the  mark  of  the  accusative.  We  see  it 
in  the  first  verse  in  Genesis,  "  In  the  beginning  God  created 
[eth]  the  heaven  and  [eth]  the  earth."  This  particle  oc- 
curs forty  times  in  the  first  five  chapters,  always  with  the 
same  signification.  It  may  be  thought  that  Gen.  v.  22, 
"Enoch  walked  with  God,"  is  an  exception;  but  it  is  not. 
The  English  requires  the  preposition ;  "  walked  with "  is 
the  translation  of  the  Hebrew  verb.  Use  another  verb,  and 
the  preposition  is  not  necessary ;  as,  for  instance,  "  Enoch 
accompanied  God." 

Now  Eve  did  not  suppose  she  was  the  mother  of  God. 
She  requires  no  vindication  from  us  by  suggestions  of  omit- 
ted particles  or  errors  of  copyists,  which  theory  has  been 
worn  very  thin  in  recent  years  as  to  other  parts  of  the  Pen- 
tateuch. Luther  in  his  first  issue  of  the  Bible  translated 
the  Hebrew,  Ich  habe  den  Mann  des  Berm,  '  I  have  gotten 
a  man  from  [or  of]  Jehovah ' ;  but  in  his  next  issue  he 
translated  the  words  as  he  found  them,  Ich  habe  den  Mann 
den  Herm,  and  so  they  are  in  the  German  Bible  to-day. 
The  wealth  of  learning  and  ingenuity  which  has  been 
expended  in  making  sense  of  her  words  would  have  beeu 
saved  if  commentators  bad  sought  the  meaning  of  "Jeho- 
vah "  as  Hengstenberg  did.  The  word  "  Jehovah  "  is  the 
third  person  singular  of  the  future  tense  of  the  verb  "to 
be."  It  means  "  he  wiU  be  "  or  "  he  who  will  be."  Eve  re- 
membered the  promise  that  the  seed  of  the  woman  would 
crush  the  serpent's  head.  She  saw  in  her  chUd  the  prom- 
ised deliverer.  The  serpent  who  beguiled  her  would  be- 
guile no  more.  Doubtless  she  had  looked  forward  to  tiie 
event,  and  the  burden  of  childbearing  was  lightened.  "  Pos- 
session," she  called  her  son ;  for  she  through  whom  sin  had 
come  into  the  world  had  brought  forth  the  remedy.  Bitter 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  802.    6 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


221  BibUotheoa  Sacra  [^pi^> 

must  hare  been  the  remorse  of  onr  flrst  parents  after  their 
disobedience.  But  the  hope  of  the  Dellrerer  comforted 
their  hearts;  and  when  her  son  was  bom,  her  exclamation 
was  exultant,  "  I  have  gotten  a  man,  the  Promised  One." 

Eve  was  mistaken ;  and  as  the  child  developed,  and  she 
saw  in  him  a  sinful  being,  her  hope  faded.  Bat  the  hope 
was  not  taken  from  the  race;  and  whenever  a  mother 
brought  forth  a  man  child,  the  primal  hope  revived,  only 
to  be  disappointed.  So  the  years  passed  and  no  deliverer 
appeared.  Did  th^  lose  confidence  in  the  promise?  The 
need  was  as  great  as  ever:  the  race  increased  but  every 
generation  was  a  multiplication  of  sinners.  Peiiiaps  the 
race  was  too  corrupt  to  furnish  a  Cktnqueror  of  Satan. 
Why  not  look  elsewhere?  Why  not  appeal  to  heav^i  itself  7 
No  doubt  hesitatingly  at  first,  but  more  urgently  as  time 
went  on,  until,  in  the  days  of  Enosh,  several  hundred  years 
after  the  birth  of  Cain,  men  b^an  to  call  npon  the  name 
of  Jehovah  the  Coming  One  (Oen.  iv.  26). 

The  history  of  the  race  during  that  dispensation,  as  of 
every  dispensation  since,  was  a  history  of  degeneracy. 
Men's  imaginations  were  only  evil  continually.  Still,  some 
truth  must  have  survived  amid  the  goieral  decline,  for 
Noah  "  was  a  righteous  man,  and  blameless  in  his  genera* 
tions;  Noah  walked  vrith  Ood."  We  find  him  using  the 
name  "Jehovah"  (Oen.  ix.  26)  and  recognizing  His  di- 
vinity, "  Blessed  be  Jehovah,  the  God  of  Shem."  This  may 
be  a  limitation  of  Jehovah  as  Ood  of  a  race,  but  the  limi- 
tation —  if  it  be  such  —  disappears  at  the  next  occurrence 
of  the  name.  Melchizedek  (Oen.  xiv.  19-22)  met  Abram 
and  said,  "  Blessed  be  Abram  of  Ood  Host  High  [El  El- 
yoni,  possessor  of  heaven  and  earth."  And  Abram  re- 
sponded, "  I  have  lifted  up  mine  band  unto  Jehovah,  Ood 
Most  High,  possessor  of  heaven  and  earth,"  —  the  same 
terms  that  Melchlzedefc  had  used,  and  identifying  Ood 
Most  High  irith  Jehovah.  In  the  mouth  of  Eve,  the  Ex- 
pected One  was  a  human  being;  but  now  with  Abraham 
He  is  recognized  as  divine. 

In  the  next  chapter  (Gen.  xv.  7)  God  accepts  the  name. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Jekomk  326 

That  He  conld  be  both  Qod  and  man  was  a  wonder  too 
great  for  men's  intellect  thenj  and  it  is  an  amasing  mya- 
ter;  still,  too  great  for  doubting  minds.  Thenceforward, 
in  the  month  of  the  patriarchs,  Jehovah  is  a  name  exdu- 
Birelf  divine.  The  incident  at  Mamre  (Gen.  xviii.)  ma; 
indicate  some  bewUderment  in  the  mind  of  Abraham. 
Three  persons  in  human  form  appeared  to  him.  Two  of 
them,  who  are  called  angels  (Qen.  xiz.  1),  passed  on  to 
the  destruction  of  Sodom.  Abraham  prayed  to  the  other, 
but  did  not  address  him  as  Jehovah.  Was  Abraham  per- 
plexed by  the  appearance  in  human  form?  But  it  was  Je- 
hovah (xix.  13) ;  and  thereafter,  through  all  the  story  of 
the  patriarchs,  Jehovah  is  identified  with  Elohim.  Did  the 
promise  of  the  Deliverer,  the  Seed  of  the  woman,  fade  from 
the  memory  of  men?  It  woold  almost  seem  so.  They  used 
the  name  "  Jehovah "  as  the  name  of  Ood ;  but  did  th^ 
appreciate  its  meaning?  It  hardly  seems  that  they  did, 
but  the  last  words  of  Jacob  (Oen.  zlix.  18)  recall  the 
primal  promise.  He  gathers  bis  sons  together,  and  fore- 
tells their  future  one  by  one.  He  sudd^y  breaks  his  dis- 
course by  ejaculating,  "  I  have  waited  for  thy  salvation,  O 
Jehovah."  What  was  it  for  which  he  had  waited?  Was  it 
not  the  cmshing  of  the  serpent's  head  ?  But  whether  Jacob 
regarded  the  Deliverer  as  human  or  divine  we  cannot  tell. 
Passing  on  to  the  time  of  Moses,  we  find  in  Ex.  iii.  14, 
15,  the  solemn  assumption  of  the  name  "  Jehovah "  by 
Elohim,  the  Ood  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob.  He  de- 
clares Jehovah  His  memorial  name.  There  is  a  promise  in 
it.  He  is  not  only  Creator  and  Baler  of  mankind  and  of 
all  living  creatures,  but  One  whose  greatest  blessing  lay 
still  in  the  future: — 

"And  Qod  said  unto  Moses,  /  will  be  that  I  will  be.  .  .  . 
Thus  Shalt  tbon  say  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  /  toill  he 
bath  sent  me  unto  you.  And  Qod  said  moreover  unto 
Moses,  Thus  shalt  thou  say  unto  the  children  of  Israel,  He 
who  icill  be,  the  Qod  of  your  fathers,  the  God  of  Abraham, 
the  God  of  Isaac,  and  the  Ood  of  Jacob,  hath  sent  me  unto 
yon:  this  is  my  name  for  ever,  and  this  is  my  memorial 
onto  all  generations"  (Ex.  iii,  14,  15). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


226  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

The  three  italicised  phraaee  are  each  one  word  in  He- 
brew. All  are  in  the  future  tense  of  the  verb  "  to  be,"  — 
the  first  and  second  in  the  first  person,  the  third  in  the 
third  person  of  that  tense.  In  the  mai^in  of  the  Revised 
Version  will  be  tonnd  the  correct  translation,  "  I  will  be," 
and  the  statement  that  Jehovah  is  from  the  same  root.  As 
if  to  emphasize  the  future  sis^niflcance,  God  uses  the  first 
person,  "  I  will  be,"  and  repeats  the  phrase,  and  then  de- 
clares His  memorial  name,  "  He  will  be,"  Jehovah.  It  is 
a  prophecy  of  the  central  fact  in  the  history  of  mankind, 
—  the  Incarnation  of  the  Son  of  God. 

It  is  the  misfortune  of  the  human  mind  that  it  cannot 
accept  God's  promises  in  their  simplicity.  It  argues  about 
them,  and  changes  their  significance  to  make  them  more 
credible.  The  promise  was  that  the  work  of  Satan  would 
be  counteracted  by  the  seed  of  the  woman.  That  surely 
must  be  a  man;  hot  when  the  Promised  One  delayed  His 
coming,  men  lost  their  expectation  of  a  fature  deliverance. 
In  Moses  the  promise  was  renewed.  Jehovah  was  Qod,  and 
was  present,  but  was  coming  still.  And  yet  a  strangeness 
clung  to  the  word.  It  was  viewed  with  reverence,  which 
later  d^enerated  into  a  superstitious  fear  of  pronouncing 
it;  and  now  our  English  translators  avoid  its  meaning. 
The  prophets  make  it  clear  that  the  Son  of  David  is  also 
the  Sou  of  God,  but  Israel  could  not  or  would  not  accept 
the  mystery.  At  length  the  Coming  One  appeared  and  an- 
nounced Himself  "I  Am." 

Perhaps  this  inquiry  may  throw  some  light  upon  the 
perplexing  passage,  Ex.  vi.  23 :  God  said  unto  Moses,  I  am 
Jehovah:  and  I  appeared  unto  Abraham,  unto  Isaac,  and 
unto  Jacob,  as  God  Almighty  [El  Shaddai] ;  but  by  my 
name  Jehovah  I  was  not  known  to  them."  How  could 
this  be?  The  patriarchs  worshiped  Jehovah.  How,  then, 
could  it  be  said  that  He  was  not  known  to  them?  The 
promise  contained  In  the  meaning  of  the  name  was  ob- 
scured to  them.  It  ought  not  to  remain  obscure.  The 
whole  Bible  points  to  Redemption  through  the  God  Man, 
Jesus  of  Nazareth.     Upon  Him  human  destiny  depends. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


191 S]  Jehovah  227 

The  union  of  God  and  mankind  was  broken  by  a  sin:  it 
is  restored  by  the  Christ.* 

■ThlB  Interpretatloa  la  not  new.  The  newness  In  tbis  paper 
consists  In  limiting  the  Inquiry  to  the  Pentatencb.  H^igstenberg, 
Pjre  Smltb,  and  others  haTo  presented  the  same  facts.  A  little 
book  entitled  "The  Memorial  Name,"  by  Professor  McWhorter  of 
Tale  College,  ably  dlBcnaelng  this  theme,  was  Issued  fifty  or  slxtr 
years  ago;  but  }ust  then  the  Higher  Criticism,  playing  bavoc  with 
the  Old  Testament  and  making  shuttlecocks  of  the  divine  names 
with  Tarious  hypotheses,  was  on  its  exultant  way,  and  had  no 
sympathy  with  anything  which  recognizes  the  unity  of  the  Bible, 
wblle  Conserratism  dreaded  a  disturbance  of  tradition. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


CRITICAL  NOTES 

THE  HUN  AND  THE  IMPRBCATORT  PSALHS 
To  economize  space,  but  few  of  the  Holy  Scriptnres  on 
which  the  truths  of  this  article  are  based  are  qnoted.  The 
reader,  therefore,  will  pleaae  study  it  with  his  Bible  in 
hand.  See  Ps.  zzxt.  8;  It.  15;  Izix,  24,  27;  cix,  10,  12,  13, 
18,  19. 

1.  The  tender,  foT^ving  character  of  Dayid  precludes 
understanding  these  Psalms  as  "  mere  spiteful  vengeance." 
Surely,  in  the  light  of  David's  having  twice  spared  the  life 
of  Saul,  when,  with  the  bloody  spirit  of  the  Hnn,  and  with- 
out  any  provocation  or  reason,  he  was  seeking  to  mnrder 
him,  we  must  interpret  his  writings  as  of  anything  else 
than  the  spirit  of  personal,  private,  "spiteful  revenge" 
(1  Sam.  xxiv.  1-22;  xxvi.  5-21).  The  forgiving,  noble 
spirit  of  the  writer  of  these  Psalms  caused  even  as  wicked 
a  man  as  Saul  to  confess  to  him :  "  Thou  art  more  right- 
eous than  I :  for  thou  bast  rewarded  me  good,  whereas  I 
have  rewarded  thee  evil"  (1  Sam.  zxiv.  17-19).  And,  on 
the  second  time  when  David  bad  spared  the  life  of  Saul, 
who,  notwithstanding  David  had  previously  so  forgivingly 
spared  his  life,  had  continued  to  seek  to  murder  him,  Saul 
was  so  impressed  with  the  fot^vtng  and  noble  character 
of  David,  that  he  confessed :  "  I  have  sinned :  return,  my 
son  David;  for  I  will  no  more  do  thee  harm,  because  my 
soul  [life]  was  precious  in  thine  eyes  this  day;  behold,  I 
have  played  the  fool,  and  have  erred  exceedingly"  (1  Sam. 
xxvi.  21).  This  tender,  forgiving  character  of  David  is 
shown  so  great  as  to  be  even  a  fault  in  his  great  life  —  in 
his  dealings  with  Absalom  and  Shimei  (1  Sam.  xiii.  39; 
iviii.  33;  xlx.  4-6,  21-23). 

2.  The  indorsement,  by  Jesus,  of  these  Psalms  cannot 
be  harmonized  with  interpreting  them  as  the  "  venom  of 
spite."  He  read  them,  prayed  them,  sung  them,  and  lived 
them  (Luke  X3.  42-44;  ixiv.  44-46;  Matt.  xxvi.  30).  Of 
this  hymn,  Adam  Clarke  says :  "  We  know  from  universal 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


CHtieal  Ifotea  22Q 

coneent  of  Jewish  antiquity  that  it  waa  composed  of  PBalma 
113,  114,  117,  and  118."  So,  Bengel,  G.  W.  Clark,  « The 
ComprehenaiTe  Commentary,"  and  commentators  generally. 
In  part,  these  Psalms  are  imprecatory,  —  Pa.  cziii.  18; 
adv.  1-8;  cxviii.  6-13.  Besides,  of  the  two  hundred  and 
eighty-three  New  Testament  quotations  from  the  Old,  one 
hundred  and  sixte^i  are  from  the  Psalms;  and  the  impre- 
catoiy  nature  runs  tbrongh  them  all;  at  least  none  of 
of  them  are  free  of  being  tinged  with  the  spirit  of  impre- 
cation. Jast  as  the  jadicial  is  inseparable  from  the  ten* 
demesB,  the  wisdom,  and  the  love  of  Ood,  tbrongh  both  the 
books  of  God  —  the  natural  and  the  revealed  revelation  of 
God. 

3.  In  none  of  tbe  Psalma  can  be  found  more  severe 
and  terrible  imprecations  than  are  in  tbe  words  of  Jesus  and 
of  the  apostles  (Matt.  xxiR  13-33;  zxv.  30,  41-16;  Hai^ 
iii.  20;  ziii.  10;  Luke  xvi.  23;  Bom.  i.  18,  32;  ii.  6;  1  Cor. 
xvi.  22 ;  2  Tim.  iv.  11 ;  Jude  7 ;  Rev.  xv.  7 ;  xvi.  18, 19 ;  xx.  10) . 

1.  The  aaints  in  the  intermediate  world,  in  spirit,  pray 
the  imprecations  of  the  Psalms  (Bev.  vi.  10). 

5.  From  tbe  foregoing,  it  appears  that,  of  Irath  earth 
and  Paradise,  the  imprecatory  Psalms  are  the  nature  and 
the  voice  of  the  righteons. 

6.  Without  exception,  God  commends  the  Psalms  as  a 
part  of  "  the  inspiration  of  God  "  that  is  profitable  for  re- 
proof, for  "  instruction  in  rigbteonsuess,  that  the  man  of 
God  may  Ire  thoroughly  furnished  unto  all  good  works " 
(2  Tim.  iii.  16-18).  The  imprecatory  Psalms  are  especially 
suited  for  this  age  of  outcry  against  the  infliction  of  jus- 
tice, in  both  this  world  and  in  that  which  is  to  come. 

7.  As  King,  in  the  place  of  Jehovah,  and,  as  such,  exe- 
cuting the  justice  of  the  law,  these  Psalms  were  uttered. 

8.  Bome  of  these  Psalms  —  probably  all  of  them  — 
were  the  inspired  voice  of  God,  prophetically  pronouncing 
Hia  judgments  on  obdurately  wicked  persons.  The  cases 
of  Abithophel  and  Judas  especially  illustrate  this  proposi- 
tion (2  Sam.  xvi.  21;  xvii.  23;  Acts  i  20). 

9.  As  a  righteous  man,  in  mind,  in  spirit,  and  identi- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


230  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

fled  with  Jehovah,  the  Psalmist  uttered  the  imprecatory 
Psalms.  Catiline  said:  "An  identity  of  wishes  and  aver- 
sions, this  alone  Is  true  friendship."  80  the  Psalmist  says : 
"Do  I  not  hate  them,  O  Lord,  that  hate  thee.  ...  I  count 
them  MINI  enemies."  Without  this  personal  identity  with 
one's  family,  state,  church,  human  or  divine  ruler,  there 
can  be  no  loyalty  to  either. 

10.  As  every  good  man  says,  in  heart,  Amen  to  the  vin- 
dication of  law  and  government,  in  the  execution  of  penal 
justice  on  the  criminal,  so  do  the  imprecatory  Psalms. 
Thus  Milton  prayed: — 

"Arense,  O  Lord,  tby  slaughtered  saints." 
Thus  the  civilized  world  cries  out  for  justice  upon  the  Hun, 
while  our  boys  have  emphasized  the  cry  with  their  life's 
blood.  God  pity  the  person  whose  soul  is  not  imprecatory, 
as  well  as  otiierwise.  Joseph  Cook  says:  "A  renowned 
professor,  who,  as  Germany  thinks,  has  done  more  for  New 
England  theology  than  any  man  since  Jonathan  Edwards, 
was  once  walking  in  this  city  [Boston]  with  a  clergyman 
of  radical  faith,  who  objected  to  the  doctrine  that  the 
Bible  is  inspired,  ...  on  the  ground  of  the  imprecatory 
Psalms.  .  .  .  The  doubter  would  not  be  satisfied.  The  two 
came  at  last  to  a  newspaper  bulletin,  on  which  the  words 
were  written,  —  the  time  was  at  the  opening  of  our  civil 
war,  — '  Baltimore  to  be  shelled  at  twelve  o'clock.'  *  I  am 
glad  of  it,'  said  the  radical  preacher ;  '  I  am  glad  of  it' 
'And  BO  am  I,'  said  his  companion ;  '  but  I  hardly  dare  to 
say  so,  for  fear  you  will  say  I  am  uttering  an  imprecatory 
Psalm.' " '  President  Hibben,  of  Princeton  Universi^, 
uttered  the  spirit  of  the  imprecatory  Psalms  in  saying: 
"  The  test  of  the  individual,  the  test  of  a  nation,  is  the  ca- 
pacity for  righteous  indignation;  when  we  are  confronted 
with  great  moral  wrongs  we  must  oppose  them  with  the 
anger  that  is  like  the  flaming  sword  of  the  wrath  of  God." 
The  imprecatory  Psalms,  in  the  language  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  as  they  utter  the  voice  of  the  judicial  nature 
*  Transcendraitalf Bin,  pp.  76-77. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  231 

of  penal  lav  in  earthly  goveminent  and  of  the  noly  Scrip- 
tures, are  summed  up  in :  "  Because  he  remembered  not  to 
show  mercy,  bat  persecated  the  poor  and  needy  man,  that 
he  might  ev&i  slay  the  broken  in  heart  As  he  loved  curs- 
ing, so  let  it  come  unto  him ;  as  he  delighted  not  in  bless* 
ing,  BO  let  it  be  far  from  him.  As  be  clothed  himself  with 
cursing  like  as  with  his  garment,  so  let  it  come  unto  his 
bowels  like  water,  and  like  oil  into  his  boues"  (Ps.  cix. 
16-19).  "Let  the  sighing  of  the  prisoner  come  before 
thee;  according  to  the  greatness  of  thy  power  preserve 
tboa  those  that  are  appointed  to  die :  and  render  onto  our 
nei^bors  sevenfold  into  their  bosom,  wherewith  they  have 
reproached  thee,  O  Lord"  (Ps.  Izxix.  11-12).  "I  will  not 
keep  silence,  but  will  recompense,  even  recompense  into 
their  bosoms  your  iniquities"  (Isa.  Ixv.  6-7).  "If  any 
mischief  follow,  then  thou  shalt  give  life  for  life,  eye  for 
^e,  tooth  for  tooth,  foot  for  foot,  burning  for  burning, 
wound  for  wound,  stripe  for  stripe"  (Ex.  xii.  23-24). 
(Bemember  tliat  this  law  was  not  given  for  private  revenge, 
as  enemies  of  the  Bible  represent,  but  for  execution  by  the 
conrt  of  law  —  just  as  with  us.  As  Tholuck  and  reliable 
interpreters  agree,  instead  of  repealing  this  law,  Jesns 
only  corrected  its  perversion.)  Or,  to  sum  up  the  impre- 
catory Psalms  in  the  universal  law  of  God,  that  no  whining 
against  cau  gainsay :  "  God  is  not  mocked ;  for  whatsoever 
a  man  soweth,  that  shall  he  also  reap"  (Gal.  vi.  7).  In 
exact  line  with  the  imprecatory  Psalms  is  the  nniversal 
demand  of  all  right-thinking  people  for  no  peace  before  the 
Hun  is  bound  up  to  pay  —  so  far  as  possible  —  for  his  de- 
vastation of  homes,  property,  and  for  his  worse  than  cruel 
murder  and  unmentionable  crimes.  With  thunder  tones, 
the  cry  for  justice,  coming  up  from  every  battlefield,  in 
this  war,  interprets  and  forever  vindicates  the  impreca- 
tory Psalms. 

11.  The  spirit  and  letter  of  the  imprecatory  Psalms  are 
farther  vindicated  in  that  one  of  the  severest  among  them 
prays  that,  so  far  as  possible,  its  judgments  may  be  for  the 
good  of  the  offender  —  in  resultant  reformation :  "  Fill  their 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


232  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

(aces  with  shame ;  that  they  may  se^  thy  name,  0  Lord  "* 
(Pb.  lixxiU.,  especially  ver.  16,  18). 

12.  The  Imprecatory  Paalms  are  to  be  imdwBtood  as 
poema  in  the  strongly  flgnratire  and  peculiar  Oriental  style. 
Bold  metaphors,  and  especially  startling  hyperboles,  are 
characteristics  of  Oriental  afyle.'  liax  Mailer,  who  cannot 
be  accused  of  "  orthodoxy,"  one  of  the  greatest  of  Oriental 
scholars,  says :  "  The  fault  is  oars,  not  theirs,  if  we  will- 
fnlly  misinterpret  the  language  of  the  ancient  prophets; 
if  we  persist  in  nnderstauding  their  words  in  the  outward 
and  material  aspect  only.  . .  .  Nay,  I  believe  it  can  be 
proved  that  more  than  half  the  difflcnlties  of  religious 
thoaght  owe  their  origin  to  this  constant  misinterpreta- 
tion of  ancient  language  by  modem  language,  of  ancimt 
thought  by  modem  thought." ' 

The  last  point  to  this  article  is  hardly  necessary,  for  the 
others  are  sufBcient. 

W.  A.  JAKBBL 

Dallaa,  Texas 

THE  TEXT  OF  NUMBBRS  XXI.  141. 
Thb  LXX  has  "  therefore  it  is  said  in  a  book  wo\eftiK  tov 
Kvpiou  niv  ZdDo/S  i<p\oyi<rtv  xat  rovt  ^«/ta/>/M>w  'Apvwv  (war  of 
the  Lord  burnt  Zohob  and  the  valleys,  Amon ) ,"  i.e.  it  trans- 
lated norte  as  "  war  of,"  and  regarded  it  as  the  subject  of 
a  following  verb.  The  divergencies  of  consonants  are  prob- 
ably as  follows: — ■ 

neiD        am         lxx 
nBiD3        am  M.T. 

where  the  presence  or  absence  of  "  in  "  must  be  due  to  dit- 
tography  or  haplography  of  3  (according  to  which  text  be 
deemed  the  earlier) ,  and  the  verb  is  in  the  feminine,  agree- 
ing with  "  war."    For  the  form  with  o  cp.  Amos  vi.  10. 

Most  Septuaginttil  texts  then  proceed  «o*  tow  x^'f^'VP''^ 

KaTtvTiffffv  KarotKivai'Hp.    So    the    words  HDj  ^c^<.  "  which 

inclined,"    were    unknown     to    the    Greek     translators. 

'See  Lowtli'B  Lectures  on  Hebrew  Poetry,  De  Wette'B  Introdtic- 

tion  to  the  Old  Testamnnt,  and  Dr.  Conant  on  PBalma. 

■  Lectures  on  The  Science  of  Religion,  p.  26. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  233 

It  may  be  Burmised  that  the  explanation  is  as  fol- 
lows :  The  clauBC  begins  with  a  word  ""PW  which  is  treated 
by  modem  commentators  as  a  SQbstantive  not  foond  else- 
where in  the  singular.  It  appears,  however,  to  have  been 
regarded  (I  think  rightly)  as  a  verb  by  the  ancients,  and 
the  explanation  no]  ifk  i.e.  lei*  means  fO]  (« inclined  ") 
was  written  in  the  margin  and  taken  into  the  test  in  a 
slightly  corrupt  form.  The  verb  Is  mascnliae,  so  that 
"  war "  cannot  be  its  subject.  Another  Greek  translator 
(see  Field's  Hexapla  ad.  loc.)  appears  to  have  rendered 
"  therefore  it  is  said  in  a  list  of  warriors  of  the  Lord  to 
Auiiab  in  a  whirlwind,  and  of  the  torrents  to  Arnon;  for 
the  ontponring  of  the  torrents  inclined,"  etc.  He  there- 
fore had  TOJ  D'i'njn  new,  read  some  other  word  for  "  war," 
and  possibly  found  other  differences;  but  not  much  can  be 
made  out  of  small  points  where  we  have  to  do  with  a 
Byriac  rendering  of  a  Qreek  translation. 

This,  however,  does  not  exhaust  the  Greek  testimony, 
for  a  o  a,  and  the  Ethiopic  omit  the  second  xai  row  ^ei/ta/>. 
pow.  which  may  of  course  quite  probably  have  come  in  from 
the  preceding  verse:  d,  however,  omits  rot/v  ^<(jiMi/>pow 
only.  I  think  this  is  right,  and  that  the  displacement  of 
the  phrase  in  the  LXX,  as  compared  with  M.T.  is  due  to 
its  being  a  later  insertion.  "(Amon)  inclineth  toward 
the  dwelling  of  Ar  and  leans  on  the  borders  of  Moab " 
makes  good  enough  sense,  but  can  scarcely  be  combined 
with  a  statement  that  "the  war  of  the  Lord  burnt  Zohob 
and  the  valleys,  Amon." 

It  may  be  suggested  that  the  seat  of  the  trouble  lies 
in  archetypal  or  pre-archetypal  damage  to  a  masculine 
imperfect  verb,  which,  after  it  had  become  illegible,  was 
read  niir.  Amon  is  clearly  the  subject  of  all  the  verbs.  The 
passage  will  then  have  run  something  like  this :  "  There- 
fore it  is  said  in  the  book  of  warriors  [?  war,  wars]  Ar- 
non [missing  verb]  Zohab  [?  Zahab,  Waheb]  in  Suphah 
[or,  if  the  LXX  be  preferred,  Waheb  may  be  a  corruption 
of  a  word  in  the  construct  state]  and  the  valleys,  and  in- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


234  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

clineth  toward  the  dwelling  of  Ar  and  leaneth  to  ttte  tx>r- 
dera  of  Moab." 

Habold  M.  Wiener 
London,  England 

HXODUS  IV.  16 

The  M.T,  here  has  the  extraordinary  phrase  "  thon 
shalt  be  to  him  for  a  God."  I  call  this  "  extraordinary," 
because  it  is  contrary  to  the  whole  thought  of  the  Penta- 
teuch that  Moses  should  be  represented  as  standing  in  such 
a  relation  to  a  fellow  Israelite  (as  contrasted  with  an 
Egyptian  like  Pharaoh).  The  ordinary  Septuagiotal  texts, 
however,  read  ra  ir/)o?  tow  ©eoi*,  "  to  Godward,"  as  in  iviii. 
19=  D'n^Kn  yiD  for  M.T.  n^nhtth.  It  is  easy  to  see  that  the 
discrepancy  may  have  originated  in  damage  to  >io  in  the 
ancestor  of  the  Palestinian  text.  The  Old  Latin  has  Dnm, 
Lord,  for  God.  I  think,  therefore,  that  the  earliest  text  had 
either  the  Tetragrammaton  or  "  the  Baal."  I  prefer  not 
to  choose  between  these  till  we  have  before  us  the  full  col- 
lections Dahse  is  understood  to  have  made,  and  can  study 
the  problem  of  the  divine  appellations  in  the  Pentateuch  - 
as  a  whole.  Damage  to  the  '?vs  in  either  reading  would 
give  our  present  Hebrew,  for  no  Jew  would  write  the  Tet- 
ragrammaton  after  the  expression  "  thon  shalt  be  to  him 
for." 

Habou>  M.  Wibnbb 

London,  England 

NAVILLB  ON  THE  COMPOSITION  AND  SOURCES  OP  OBNB8I3 

[Revue  de  VHiatoire  des  Religions  (Paris,  1918)  con- 
tains an  article  by  fidonard  Naville,  entitled  "  Xol  Compo- 
sition et  les  Sources  de  la  Gen^se."  As  it  is  too  long  (38 
8vo  pages)  for  us  to  reprint  a  translation,  we  are  pleased 
to  give  the  following  summary,  prepared  by  Professor  John 
Boaf  Wigbtman,  Ph.D.,  of  Oberlin  College. — Editor.] 

H,  Navillb  first  recalls  how  in  two  previous  works,  viz. 
"Archfeology  of  the  Old  Testament"  (London,  1913)  and 
*'  The  Text  of  the  Old  Testament "  (The  Schweich  Lectnres, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  235 

lioudoii,  1915),  he  had  shown  that  the  so-called  "Books 
of  Moaes  "  were  not  original  works,  and  that  they  had  not 
been  written  in  Hebrew;  and  how,  in  his  article  entitled 
"  The  Two  Names  of  Ood  in  Genesis,"  published  in  Revue 
de  I'Sistoire  dea  Religions  (1917),  he  had  shown  that  the 
Book  of  Genesis  conld  have  but  one  author,  Moses,  instead 
of  six  or  seven,  as  held  by  Kautzsch  and  Socin. 

He  now  proposes  to  examine  the  sources  from  which 
Moses  has  drawn  his  material,  —  a  task  rendered  the  more 
easy  because  of  the  recent  discoveries  of  Assyriologists. 
History  in  these  early  times,  we  know,  did  not  exist,  but 
only  biography  or  annals.  The  author  of  Genesis,  like 
those  of  other  ancient  writings,  wrote  with  a  definite  end, 
to  give  information  about  persons.  His  first  aim  would 
be  to  write  intelligibly,  and  hence  in  a  language  familiar 
to  his  readers.  Now  we  know,  from  the  excavations  of  the 
last  thirty  years,  that  this  must  have  been  the  writing  em- 
ployed in  all  western  Asia,  viz.  the  cuneiform,  which  was 
written  by  a  stylus  in  damp  clay.  It  was  in  this  cunei- 
form writing,  inexactly  called  the  Babylonian,  that  Gene- 
sis must  have  been  written.  The  writers  of  that  time  did 
not  write  "  books,"  but  "  tablets."  Now  "  tablets  "  differ 
from  "  books  "  in  being  independent,  and  sometimes  form- 
ing a  group  upon  a  certain  subject,  the  scribe  showing 
their  consecutive  order  by  repeating  the  last  words  of  one 
at  the  beginning  of  the  next.  They  resemble  the  several 
lectures  in  a  course.  Of  the  vast  number  of  Babylonian 
tablets  of  the  time  of  Moses,  the  majority  were  on  relig- 
ious subjects,  as  tbe  creation  of  the  world,  and  these 
formed  the  bases  for  the  religions.  Composed  in  Sume- 
rian,  the  legends  were  later  rewritten  and  transformed 
under  Semitic  influence.  At  this  early  period  the  tablets 
were  not  used  in  commerce,  but  were  in  coUections,  either 
in  royal  libraries  or  in  a  chest  or  jar,  as  at  Tel  el  Amama. 
In  Moses'  day,  more  so  even  than  to-day,  a  knowledge  of 
writing  was  in  the  East  the  privilege  of  the  few.  To 
this  few  belonged  Moses  himself,  who  was  brought  up  at 
Pharaoh's  court  and  '  learned  in  all  the  wisdom  of  tbe 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


j!S6  BibUotheca  Sacra  [April, 

Egyptians.'  Bat  his  brethren,  the  Eebrewa,  were  sorely 
illiterate;  or,  if  they  had  a  written  language,  it  mast  hare 
been  the  Babylonian  cnneiform,  written  on  tablets  such 
as  were  in  use  not  only  in  Mesopotamia  but  in  Palestine. 
As  a  Semite  and  a  learned  man,  Moses  would  certainly 
know  this  language  and  writing. 

Bnt  Moses  was  not  a  simple  scribe.  He  is  to  be  the 
founder  of  a  new  religion,  to  give  a  basis  to  the  worship 
of  Jehovah.  For  this,  like  the  ancient  Babylonian  scribes, 
he  drew  up  religions  tablets,  apon  creation  and  the  del- 
uge, and  later  he  teUs  of  the  lives  of  the  ancestors  of  the 
Hebrews,  —  of  Abraham,  Isaac,  Jacok,  and  Joseph.  These 
tablets  of  the  "  Genesis  "  are  anonymous ;  while  the  later 
ones,  where  Moses  is  the  l^islator,  bear,  as  we  should  ex- 
pect, his  name. 

Now  Moses  needed  to  reveal  to  his  people  the  record  of 
Oenesis,  to  remind  them  that  they  were  a  people  apart, 
chosen  by  Jehovah ;  that  they  must  leave  Egypt,  not  merely 
because  of  persecution,  but  to  preserve  Jehovah's  worship. 
Moreover,  as  all  other  religions  of  the  East,  so  also  the 
Hebrews,  mnst  have  docnm«it8  to  tell  them  of  their  origin 
and  to  form  the  basis  of  their  religion.  The  use  of  such 
sources,  however,  does  not  affect  the  book's  unity  or  prevent 
its  being  the  work  of  Moses.  The  theory  of  Astruc  and 
Eichhom,  on  the  contrary,  professes  to  have  found  four 
documents,  quite  parallel  and  much  alike,  but  distinguished 
from  each  other  by  the  names  —  Elohim  or  Jehovah  or  Tah- 
veh  —  which  they  give  to  the  divinity.  One  objection  to 
tbis  theory  is  that  in  the  second  and  third  chapters  of 
Oenesis,  where  the  name  Yahveh  first  occurs,  God  is  al- 
ways called  by  both  names,  i.e.  Yaliveh  Elohim.  Again,  the 
band  of  Moses,  the  man  who  knows  Egypt  tborougtily,  is 
evident  in  many  places.  Bnt  the  fundamental  objection 
to  the  Yabveb-Elohim  theory  is  that  it  makes  the  book  a 
mosaic  of  diflFerent  fragments  instead  of  a  unit,  of  which 
Yahveh  Elohim,  the  only  God  of  man,  is  the  cornerstone. 
The  Book  of  Graiesis  has  but  one  aim,  viz.  to  show  that 
Israel  was  the  chosen  people,  the  people  of  God;  and  other 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Note$  237 

erraits,  however  important,  are  omitted  or  tonched  on  but 
elightly.  This  one  purpose  of  the  writer  of  Genesis,  thinks 
H.  Naville,  has  been  too  much  lost  si^t  of  by  critics ;  and 
he  proceeds  to  ask  what  were  the  documents  extending 
from  the  creation  of  the  world  to  the  death  of  Joseph,  i.e. 
all  anterior  to  the  time  of  Moses,  which  the  latter  made 
ose  of. 

I.  The  first  series  of  tablets,  six  in  number,  takes  in 
the  first  eleven  chapters,  and  leads  us  to  Abraham.  The 
prime  object  being  to  show  the  descent  of  the  man  who  is 
to  be  the  father  of  Ood's  chosen  people,  genealogies  abound 
in  these  tablets.  Unity  of  plan  is  visible  thronghout. 
From  the  creation  of  the  world  all  leads  towards  Abraham. 
The  descendants  of  Japheth  and  Ham  are  given,  for  com- 
pleteness, but  not  dwelt  on,  as  are  those  of  Bhem,  the  an- 
cestor of  Abram.  Chapter  xi.,  contrary  to  viewe  of  critics, 
is  a  unity.  Abraham  (chap,  xii.)  had  received  the  order 
of  Yahveh  to  leave  his  coantry  and  his  father's  house  and 
emigrate  to  the  land  of  Canaan.  It  is  for  a  religious  mo- 
tive that  he  is  to  emigrate,  that  he  may  worship  his 'Gh>d 
in  peace,  and  leave  idolaters.  But  he  is  to  go,  not  alone, 
but  rather  as  the  sheik,  with  servants  and  docks.  In  this 
religious  migration  it  is  hi^ly  probable  that  Abram,  as 
founders  of  sects  in  our  day,  would  take  with  him  his  sa- 
cred books,  especially  as  these  contained  his  genealogy, 
and,  being  in  the  form  of  tablets,  could  be  easily  carried. 

These  tablets,  then,  brought  by  Abraham  from  Haran, 
contain  the  sources  for  the  first  eleven  chapters  of  Genesis. 
Perhaps  these  tablets  w1ere  not  all  by  the  same  author,  and 
this  may  explain  the  two  names  for  God;  but  we  must 
hold  that  Moses  wrote  them  anew,  and  did  for  Yahveh 
what  Babylonian  scribes  did  for  their  gods. 

The  first  tablet,  which  tells  specially  of  the  creation  of 
the  heavens  and  the  earth,  includes  the  first  chapter  and 
the  first  four  verses  of  the  second  —  ending  with  the  words, 
*  Such  are  the  origins,  —  or,  such  is  the  history,  —  of  the 
heavens  and  the  earth,  when  they  were  created.'  In  the 
first  tablet  Ood  is  called  Elohim,  which  is  not  the  God  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


238  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Aprils 

man,  but  of  the  whole  of  nature.  Man  is  created  the  same 
day  as  the  terrestrial  animals,  but  as  yet  has  no  moral  or 
spiritual  element.  ^Nothing  is  said  as  to  how  the  creation 
has  taken  place,  and  the  word  "  day "  that  is  employed 
means  merely  a  space  of  time  having  a  beginning  and  an 
end.  The  second  tablet  deals  with  the  creation  of  man,  or 
rather  of  humanity,  and  extends  to  chap.  t.  1,  which  ahonld 
read :  '  This  is  the  book  of  the  birth  of  men,  or  of  human- 
ity.' The  word  "Adam  "  here  is  really  a  collective,  which 
the  LXX  translates  by  the  Greek  anthr6p6n. 

In  the  first  tablet  is  unfolded  the  series  of  creations, 
without  further  explanations;  in  the  second  we  are  told 
how  man  is  bom,  how  a  companion  is  given  him,  and  how 
the  garden  of  E6eu  is  formed  for  him.  Then  comes  the 
fall  and  its  consequences  for  the  family  of  Adam. 

There  is  no  contradiction  between  the  two  chapters. 
The  first  mentions  historically  the  creation  of  man,  the 
second  gives  it  in  detail.  Critics  point  out  the  differences 
between  the  accounts  of  the  creation  in  the  first  and  sec- 
ond chapters  and  explain  them  by  their  theory  of  two  dif- 
ferent sources.  But  the  opposition  is  really  only  apparent 
The  difficulty  is  largely  due  to  a  too  literal  rendering  of 
the  ancient  versions.  Because  there  was  no  pluperfect 
tense  in  languages  tike  the  Hebrew,  one  must  not  infer 
that  the  idea  expressed  by  it  was  lacking.  We  should 
adopt  the  old  Geneva  translation,  '  Now  the  Eternal  had 
formed  man  from  the  dust  of  the  ground  .  .  .  had  planted 
a  garden  in  Eden,  .  .  .  and  had  placed  there  the  man  .  .  . 
and  the  Eternal  God  had  formed  all  the  beasts  of  the 
field,'  etc.  This  translation,  M.  Kaville  holds,  is  not  only 
permissible,  but  it  avoids  the  many  ditDculties  raised  by 
the  authorized  rendering,  and  perfectly  reconciles  the  ac- 
count of  creation  in  the  first  and  second  chapters.  The 
description  of  the  watering  of  the  garden  of  Bden,  viz.  by 
a  river,  with  its  four  great  streams,  is  not  aoch  as  would 
have  been  furnished  by  a  writer  of  Palestine,  but  would 
be  perfectly  natural  to  one  who,  like  Mosea,  was  accus- 
tomed to  the  fertilizing  effects  of  the  great  river  Nile. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Cntical  Notes  239 

Another  argumeDt  that  critics  have  found  to  prove  that 
the  first  and  second  chapters  are  not  by  the  same  authors, 
is  that  they  give  different  conceptions  of  the  divinity.  The 
first  chapter  tells  us  merely  that  God  speaks,  but  in  chap, 
lii.  8,  "  They  heard  the  voice  of  the  Lord  walking  in  the 
garden."  But  here,  as  elsevhere,  the  translation  need  not 
be  too  literal,  and  may  be  translated  merely  as,  '  was  re- 
sounding here  and  there.' 

One  must  never  forget  that  in  ancient  texts  abstract 
terms  are  but  few,  and  ideas  must  be  expressed  by  things 
that  appeal  to  the  senses,  and  words  are  often  figurative. 
So,  in  creation,  we  are  not  told  that  God  vHlled  or  decided, 
but  that  God  said.  In  the  second  chapter,  as  in  the  first, 
God  spoke.  The  same  word  is  used  in  both,  but  man,  as 
an  animate  being,  can  and  does  reply. 

One  fundamental  truth  is  evident  in  the  first  chapters, 
as  in  the  whole  Old  Testament,  that  man  has  one  single 
God,  Yahveh,  the  same  as  Elohim,  the  Creator,  and  that  is 
why  he  is  called  only  Yahveh  Mobim. 

Another  reason  why  the  first  two  tablets,  viz.  the  one 
that  includes  chaps,  i.-ii.  4,  and  the  second,  which  includes 
chaps,  ii.  5-v.  1,  are  intimately  connected,  is  the  risumSs 
which  determine  them  both.  Quoting  from  the  LXX, 
chap.  ii.  4  reads,  '  Such  is  the  book  of  the  birth  of  the 
heavens  and  the  earth  when  it  was  bom,'  and  chap.  v.  I 
reads,  '  Such  is  the  book  of  the  birth  of  humanity.'  The 
Hebrew  word  tholdoth  is  here  equivalent  to  the  Greek 
genesis,  and  means  birth  or  origin,  as  in  Matt.  i.  1,  though 
in  many  cases  it  has  the  meaning  of  posterity. 

Thus  the  first  two  tablets  follow  each  other  and  are 
logically  connected.  They  were  the  first  brought  by  Abra- 
ham, and  were  written  anew  by  Moses,  not  to  change  the 
name  of  God,  but  to  teach  that  Yahveh  Elohim  was  the 
God  of  creation. 

Tbe  third  tablet  begins  with  the  same  word  as  the  sec- 
ond :  '  In  the  day  when.'  Moses  wishes  to  tell  us  of  Abraham, 
and  so  in  the  genealogies  be  dwells  on  the  posterity  of 
Seth.  That  of  Cain  he  does  not  give;  though  for  a  modem 
Vol.  UCXVI.    No.  302.    7 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


210  Bibliotheca  8acra  [April, 

historian  this  would  have  had  great  interest,  as  telling  of 
the  rise  of  agriculture  and  metallurgy  in  the  persons  of 
Cain  and  Tnbal  Cain.  This  tablet  ends  with  chap.  ri.  9: 
"  This  is  the  origin  or  birth  of  Noah."  The  word  "  origin  " 
we  have  here  taken  as  a  translation  of  the  Greek  plural 
geneseia. 

The  fourth  tablet  describes  the  Deluge,  and  has  the  most 
marked  Babylonian  characteristics.  It  ends  with  the  last 
verse  of  chap,  ix.,  with  the  death  of  Noah. 

The  fifth  tablet  consists  of  chap.  x.  It  begins  with  the 
words, '  This  is  the  posterity  of  the  sons  of  Noah '  {tholdoth 
or  genesis  evidently  meaning  posterity  in  this  case),  and 
ends  with  verse  32,  '  8uch  are  the  families  of  the  sons  of 
Noah.' 

The  sixth  tablet  (chap,  xi.)  is  the  last.  It  tells  first  of 
the  Tower  of  Babel  and  the  dispersion  of  mankind;  then, 
of  the  genealogies,  throagh  8hem  and  Arphachshad,  of 
Terah,  the  father  of  Abraham;  and  finally  of  Teiah's 
death,  at  the  time  of  the  call  of  Abraham.  Though  critics 
have  tried  to  find  three  different  authors  of  this  chapter, 
it  is  a  manifest  unity. 

The  six  abovementioned  tablets  are  considered  by  M. 
Naville  as  the  most  ancient  sources  of  Genesis.  They 
were  brought  by  Abraham,  when  he  left  Mesopotamia, 
and  were,  in  accordance  with  the  usual  practice  at  that 
time,  made  over  again  by  Moses. 

II.  With  chap.  xii.  we  begin  the  life  of  Abraham.  Now 
Abraham  was  both  a  great  chief  or  sbeik  and  also  a  relig- 
ious leader.  Hence  it  was  of  prime  importance  that  there 
should  be  written  down  the  official  events  of  his  family, 
and  especially  the  commissions  given  him  by  Jehovah. 
Doubtless  Eliezer,  or  some  other  intendant,  was  given 
this  high  task,  viz.  to  write  cuneiform  tablets  which  should 
record  the  history,  i.e.  the  genealogy  and  biography,  of 
Abraham  and  his  family.  Such  tablets  would  be  carefully 
preserved,  as  the  sole  basis  for  his  religion  and  family 
rights. 

M.  Naville  asserts  that  cuneiform  tablets  were  the  only 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  241 

existing  docomentB  till  after  Moses'  time,  and  that  the 
Yahvist  and  Ellohist  critics  have  furnished  no  possible 
sources  for  their  theories. 

Chapter  ixv.  is  an  intimate  family  document,  telling  of 
the  death  of  Abraham,  and  the  wa;  his  heritage  was  trans- 
mitted. 

The  following  tablets,  teUlng  of  the  lives  of  Isaac  and 
Jacob,  are  of  tbe  same  character.  Moses  probably  chose 
enough  from  them  for  his  plan,  which  was  to  establish  the 
election  of  the  people  of  Israel  and  its  alliance  with  Je- 
hovah and  omitting  all  else. 

Tbe  first  series  of  tablets  were,  for  the  most  part,  of  a 
general  character;  but  the  second,  as  we  have  seen,  were 
family  documents,  or  archives.  Such  tablets,  of  terra 
cotta,  could  easily  be  put  in  a  jar,  and  carried  from  one 
place  to  another,  as  archives  of  the  family  or  tribe.  That 
such  existed  is  a  far  more  likely  hypothesis,  than  the  ez- 
iBtence  of  a  number  of  authors,  quite  unknown,  such  as 
the  critics  suggest.  And  if  Moses  wrote  this  history,  he 
could  not  have  done  it  without  some  written  archives, 
which  doubtless  would  be  like  those  of  Tel  el  Amarna, 
written  in  cuneiform,  and  placed  in  a  jar  or  chest. 

III.  A  last  series  of  documents  contains  the  history  of 
Joseph  (chaps.  xl.-zlv.).  M.  IKavllle  follows  Astruc  In 
holding  to  the  unity  of  these  documents,  but  differs  from 
him  in  thinking  the  writer  not  Joseph  himself,  but  some 
scribe  in  his  employ.  The  story  is  much  better  written 
than  the  rest  of  Genesis,  evidently  the  work  of  one  who 
had  lived  at  the  court  of  Egypt.  It  is  a  simple  heart  story, 
attractive  and  fascinating,  and  with  an  admirable  literary 
sense.  Though  critics  have  tried  to  dissect  it  into  several 
docnments,  it  is  evidently  one  and  indivisible.  The  biog- 
raphy is  about  as  long  as  that  of  Abraham,  with  a  char- 
acter more  historic.  And  yet  the  history  is  strictly  the 
memoirs  of  Joseph — nothing  of  the  events  of  the  time, 
not  even  the  name  of  the  Pharaoh  who  is  reigning. 

In  having  his  biography  written,  Joseph  was  but  fol- 
lowing the  customs  of  the  great  Egyptians,  who  had  their 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


212  Bihliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

Ures  recorded  on  their  tombs,  if  not  in  tablets.  Bnt  Joseph 
remained  a  Hebrew  and  faithful  to  the  vorBhip  of  Jehovah, 
and  made  his  brethren  swear:  'When  God  shall  visit  you, 
carry  away  from  here  my  bones  with  you.'  Joseph's  body 
was  embalmed  and  bis  mummy  preserved  by  his  family; 
and  beside  it  would  doubtless  be  placed  his  memoirs,  en- 
graven, DOt  as  inscriptions  on  his  tomb,  but  on  tablets. 
The  veneration  in  which  be  was  held  is  seen  from  Ex.  xiii. 
19,  which  tells  us  that  Moses  took  with  him  the  bones  of 
Joseph;  and  from  Josb.  zziv.  32,  where  we  are  told  that 
Joshua  buried  at  Shechem  the  bones  of  Joseph.  The  biog- 
raphy, then,  of  Joseph,  from  its  intimately  personal  char- 
acter, and  its  almost  total  omission  of  outward  events, 
bears  every  mark  of  having  been  written  during  his  life. 
Moreover,  soon  after  his  death,  a  revolution  banished  the 
HyksoB  kings  —  the  Pharaohs  of  Joseph  —  and  all  traces 
of  foreign  influence. 

M.  Naville  shows  hoiC'  improbable  are  the  views  of  the 
critics  as  to  Oenesis.  They  suppose  Yahvistic  and  Elohis- 
tic  writers,  the  former  in  the  ninth  century,  and  the  latter 
a  century  later.  But  as  to  who  such  authors  werft,  why  they 
did  not  name  themselves,  by  whom  they  were  commissioned, 
why  they  wrote,  and  whence  they  obtained  their  information, 
the  critics  can  tell  uB  nothing.  As  little  can  they  tell  ub 
about  the  supposed  compiler,  of  the  fourth  century,  who  out 
of  the  rival  Jahvistic  and  Elohistic  writings  made  "  Gene- 
sis." But,  besides  that  the  conception  of  a  "  compiler "  is 
utterly  foreign  to  the  Ancient  Orient,  we  note  how  utterly 
improbable  it  is  that  '  the  fundamental  chart  which  estab- 
lished the  alliance  of  Jehovah  with  Israel  and  the  choice 
of  Israel,  as  an  elect  people,  should  be  known  by  Israel, 
only  at  the  time  when,  as  a  dying  nation,  it  had  lost  its 
independence.  Can  it  be  that  only  then  did  the  Hebrews 
obtain  that  one  of  their  sacred  books  which  should  have 
preceded  all  the  others?' 

M.  Naville  ends  his  carefully  written  and  illuminating 
article  by  stating  that  the  so-called  "  Higher  Criticism " 
has  too  often  deviated  from  sound  principles  by  judging 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  CHtical  Notes  243 

of  ancient  facts  from  the  point  of  view  of  what  they  con- 
sider likely  or  possible.  Thus  the  critical  spirit  is  none 
other  than  their  own  personal  and  modem  point  of  view, 
substituted  for  the  real  view  of  the  past.  This  is  partic- 
ularly true  of  the  way  the  higher  critics  have  treated  the 
Book  of  Oenesis.  In  order  to  prove  a  system  conceived 
according  to  modem  ideas,  which  are  really  the  personal 
ideas  of  those  who  hold  it,  they  have  supposed  a  nnmber 
of  authors,  utterly  unknown,  of  whom  no  trace  exists.  The 
very  fact  that  the  critics  differ  as  to  the  number  of  such 
authors,  is  a  proof  that  they  are  giving  us  not  history,  but 
their  own  personal  opinions.  Thus  these  critics,  instead 
of  deriving  their  systems  from  the  documents,  first  form 
their  systems,  and  then  force  the  documents  to  conform, 
correcting  the  texts  where  they  are  considered  faulty. 

To  show  what  a  jnst  criticism  of  ancient  authors  im- 
plies, M.  ]VavUle  quotes,  in  closing,  the  words  of  Fustel 
de  Conlanges,  in  "Questions  historiques"  (written  about 
1866)  :  'The  critical  spirit  applied  to  the  historian,  con- 
sists in  laying  aside  absolute  logic  and  the  intellectual 
conceptions  of  the  present;  it  consists  in  taking  the  texts 
such  as  the;  have  been  written,  in  their  proper  and  literal 
sense,  interpreting  them  as  simply  as  possible,  without 
intermingling  our  own  interpretation.  The  essence  of  the 
critical  spirit,  as  applied  to  the  history  of  the  past,  is  to 
believe  the  ancients.' 

John  Roap  Wiohtman 

Oherlin,  Ohio 

"THE  STUDENT'S  THEODORE" 

[The  following  pages,  written  by  Professor  Qola,  of 
Lhasa  University,  form  the  introduction  to  the  revised 
edition  of  Dr.  Budna  Kho's  well-known  work  to  be  issued 
early  in  the  spring  of  3814. 

Chaeu.es  Db  Wolfe  Browbb.^] 

It  affords  me  great  pleasure  to  have  the  high  privilege 
of  supplying  the  foreword  for  the  new  and  enlarged  edi- 

'Eev,  Charlee  De  W,  Brower  (Oberlln  College,  1883;  Yale  Divin- 
ity Scbool,  1886)  Is  now  pastor  at  Sanford,  Florida. — Eorroa. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


244  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

tion  of  m;  esteemed  colleague's  volume  which  now  appears 
under  a  slightl;  changed  title. 

Hine  years  have  passed  since  the  first  edition  of  "  The 
Theodore  Myth  "  was  issued.  Its  reception  was  most  grat- 
ifying. It  was  adopted  for  supplementary  reading  in  the 
Tibetan  secondary  schools,  and  has  had  general  circola- 
tion  throughout  Asia,  while  the  demand  from  Africa  has 
been  larger  even  than  was  expected.  On  account  of  the 
results  presented  in  the  work,  but  also  on  account  of  the 
method  of  approach  and  treatment  of  the  subject,  it  has 
fully  maintained  the  reputation  of  Lhasa  University,  and 
fulfilled  the  expectation  of  Dr.  Kho's  friends. 

Meantime,  the  author  has  continued  his  researches,  and, 
taking  advantage  of  the  liberal  provision  made  by  the  Uni- 
versity for  travel,  has  visited  by  air  ship  the  regions  where 
once  flourished  the  great  cities  of  the  American  eastern 
coast.  By  use  of  deep-sea  diving,  and  investigations  among 
the  people  who  still  linger  among  the  adjacent  hills,  he 
has  procured  additional  data  of  marked  value.  He  has, 
besides,  had  the  cooperation  of  the  scholarly  Professor 
Mgandu,  of  the  Zulu  Philological  Society.  With  this  ad- 
ditional preparation  and  assistance  and  in  view  of  the 
popularity  of  the  first  work,  a  new  edition  of  "  Theodore," 
revised  to  date,  was  warranted ;  but  also,  and  emphatically, 
because  of  the  attacks  made  in  recent  years,  and  growing 
more  bold,  on  the  very  historicity  of  this  ancient  char- 
acter. Magazine  articles  and  addresses  before  the  learned 
societies  of  Asia  and  Africa  culminated  in  a  volume  which 
has  attempted  to  discredit  the  results  of  Dr.  Elho's  work. 
The  revised  work  appears  with  the  title  "  The  Student's 
Theodore." 

It  remains  for  me  to  present  only  a  few  comprehensive 
statements  regarding  the  problem  to  the  solution  of  which 
my  learned  associate  has  given  so  much  profound  stud; 
for  many  years,  with  such  satisfactory  results. 

Accepting  the  historicity  of  the  remarkable  man,  Theo- 
dore, who  lived  about  two  thousand  years  ago,  as  proved 
by  voluminous  testimony,  the  problem  was  to  isolate  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  245 

real  personality  of  the  ancient  American  from  the  mass 
of  tradition  which  had  gathered  about  him;  iu  a  word,  to 
reveal  reality.  The  peculiar  difDculty  of  the  problem  is 
apparent  when  we  consider  the  evident  fable  element  and 
quantity  of  contradictory  material  in  the  different  ac- 
counts of  this  startlingly  influential  person  who  had  such 
a  powerful  effect  on  the  life  of  his  day.  Too  much  credit 
can  hardly  be  given  to  scholars  like  Chan  Su,  Amura, 
.Sltzer,  who  have  skillfully  untangled  many  knots,  and 
shown  what  material  belongs  to  the  periods  of  the  age  to 
which  Theodore  belonged,  say  1800  to  1950,  proving  that 
the  so-called  variations  of  the  language  must  represent  the 
periods,  and  were  not  contemporaneous.  That  the  Boston- 
esque  was  the  prevailing  tongue  throughout  America  seems 
clear,  though  Chan  Su  admits  that  in  parts  of  the  far  West, 
and  South,  there  were  trifling  variations  as  late  as  1900. 
Much  study  has  also  been  given  to  a  strange  rival  of  the 
Bostonesque  used  by  an  intermingling  race  called  "  Fan," 
widely  distributed,  the  language  being  interwoven  with 
the  prevailing  one.  The  discussions  of  the  famous  Journal 
Sporting  Pages,  with  attempts  at  decipherment,  can  be 
found  in  Professor  Chan  Su's  interesting  work. 

The  extreme  difHculty  attending  the  unraveling  of  the 
Theodore  material  is  found  principally  in  the  fact  that  it 
presents  this  person  as  five  distinct  characters:  hunter, 
statesman,  warrior,  author  and  editor,  and  reformer.  It 
will  be  evident  at  once  that  it  is  antecedently  improbable, 
even  impossible,  that  any  one  person  could  have  lived  so 
many  and  incompatible  lives,  especially  as  the  records 
present  Theodore  as  excelling  in  them  all.  The  tradition- 
mytb  element  is  at  once  apparent. 

In  the  treatment  of  the  material  Dr.  Kho  has  wisely 
separated  the  various  narratives,  following  the  plan  of  his 
first  "  life,"  in  which  the  different  presentations  were  given 
in  different  inks;  but  in  this  latest  work  he  has  gathered 
the  substance  of  the  material  from  all  sources  and  classi- 
fied it  under  initials.  By  this  simple  system  H  represents 
the  hunter  narrative;  S  the  statesman;  W  the  warrior;  M 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


246  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [AprU, 

the  author  and  editor,  and  R  the  reformer.  It  has  been 
fouQd  difiQcuIt,  however,  always  to  isolate  the  narratives 
aa  clearly  as  could  be  desired. 

Dr.  Kho  rejects  the  theory  of  .^Itzer  that  there  were  at 
least  four  Theodores,  holding  that  the  one  was  bo  influen- 
tial in  one  or  more  directions  as  to  have,  as  years  passed, 
other  characters  attributed  to  him.  In  that  age  it  was  not 
rare  for  men  in  one  walk  of  life  to  be  given  titles  as  hon- 
ors or  rewards  without  reference  to  the  special  accomplish- 
ments of  the  recipients  in  the  direction  indicated  by  the 
title.  So  "  Colonel "  was  a  name  often  borne  by  non- 
military  men ;  LL.D.  or  D.D.,  by  business  or  simply  wealthy 
mrai.  Such  titles,  often  inapplicable,  would  come  in  time 
to  be  accepted  as  indicative  of  reality. 

Ah  i-egards  the  H,  or  hunter,  narrative,  which  relates  the 
,  slaying  of  many  wild  animals,  the  ancient  historian  puts 
the  story  in  Theodore's  own  mouth  for  the  sake  of  vivid- 
ness. This  H  character  can  undoubtedly  be  traced  still 
further  back  several  thousand  years  to  the  Hercules  myth 
which  describes  the  world-wide  roaming  of  that  hero,  and 
his  labors  in  kUling  many  beasts  of  ferocious  sort  in  dis- 
tant lands,  including  the  Nemean  lion.  It  would  be  en- 
tirely natural  for  the  admirers  of  Theodore  to  attach  every 
possible  element  of  greatness  to  his  life. 

Taking  up  the  W,  or  warrior,  narrative,  we  meet  at 
once  with  many  contradictions.  Some  of  the  sayings  at- 
tributed to  Theodore  advocate  peace,  though  not  peace  at 
any  price,  but  are  sufficiently  strong  to  show  that  he  could 
not  have  been  the  dashing  fighter  which  many  accounts 
suggest.  The  combination  of  peacemaker  between  nations 
and  warrior  in  one  person  is,  to  use  again  an  appropriate 
phrase,  antecedently  improbable.  There  is  a  most  interest- 
ing tradition  recently  brought  to  light  by  Dr.  Kho  which 
bears  on  this  subject,  and  which  was  found  in  some  barely 
decipherable  papers,  to  the  effect  that  a  battle  was  fought 
at  a  place  named  Armageddon.  This  story,  which  embodies 
parts  of  a  song  used  by  the  troops,  is  to  the  effect  that  a 
general  named  Wilson  routed  the  forces  of  Theodore  with 
great  slaughter,  and  that  the  latter  soon  after  retired  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  247 

practically  semi-obscurity.  Tliis  tradition  probably  was 
originated  to  reflect  discredit  on  Theodore,  and  therefore 
would  bring  no  support  to  the  claim  that  he  was  a  great 
warrior.  Other  facts  emphasize  how  truly  he  was  a  man 
of  peace;  such,  for  example,  as  the  beautiful  sketches  of 
the  love  borne  him  by  children.  For  some  long  period 
favorite  dolls  were  called  "  Teddies,"  a  pet  name  for  Theo- 
dore. These  dolls  were  imitation  bears  to  indicate  the  ex- 
pression of  affection  by  hugging,  a  natural  way  of  children 
with  dolls,  and  an  attribute  accredited  to  bears. 

As  to  the  .33,  author  and  editor,  narrative,  while  there 
is  a  voluminous  material,  it  is  clear  that  different  writers 
assumed  the  name  of  Theodore  either  for  the  sake  of  the 
reputation  attaching  to  it,  or  because  the  writings  cover- 
ing a  long  period  would  permit  of  the  appearance  of  sev- 
eral of  that  name.  Dr.  Ebo  is  of  the  opinion  that  the  real 
Theodore  did  considerable  writing,  but  as  books  as  well  as 
brief  articles  are  ascribed  to  him,  and  often  of  an  exceed- 
ingly variant  character,  —  as,  for  example,  sensational  tales 
of  hunting,  histories,  sociological  essays,  descriptions  of 
fights,  tales  of  the  border,  accurate  studies  of  the  charac- 
ter and  habits  of  animals  —  much  will  have  to  be  elimi- 
nated. The  learned  professor  is  now  at  work  compiling 
the  productions  which  a  conservatively  liberal  point  of 
view  may  accept  as  Theodore's  own.  The  variations  in 
subject,  style,  and  language  make  this  an  easier  task  than 
one  might  think;  for,  given  Dr.  Eho's  scholarship  and 
a  predetermined  idea  as  to  what  Theodore's  style,  lan- 
guage, and  thoughts  were  or  ought  to  have  been,  order  is 
soon  resolved  from  the  chaos.  As  regards  the  editor  Theo- 
dore, a  fact  militating  strongly  against  the  view  that  such 
a  position  is  to  be  attributed  to  him  is  that  he  is  repre- 
sented as  in  the  background,  a  secondary  personage,  asso- 
ciated with,  or  subordinate  to,  other  editors.  This  is  so 
wholly  inconsistent  with  all  that  we  know  abont  Theodore 
as  to  make  the  entire  narrative  untrustworthy. 

As  to  the  E,  or  reformer,  narrative,  it  is  evident  that 
there  was  abnndant  reason  for  reform  work  in  Theodore's 
day,  and  the  records  seem  rdiable  which  place  him  at  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


248  BibUotheca  Sacra  [April, 

front  of  certain  movements;  as,  for  example,  the  one  to 
abolisb  the  drinking  customs  of  society.  There  is  good 
ground  for  accepting  the  records  of  his  appearance  in  the 
country  far  west  of  New  York  as  an  advocate  of  temper- 
ance. 

Coming  to  the  B,  or  statesman,  narrative,  we  are  on 
surer  ground  than  is  as  a  rule  the  case  with  the  others,  as 
Dr.  Kho  makes  clear  to  his  readers.  Reference  only  in 
this  foreword  can  be  made  to  the  fact  that  Theodore  was 
at  one  time  governor,  or  president,  aa  the  chief  ruler  was 
called,  of  that  part  of  the  continent  named  the  United 
States,  and  that  he  was  an  eflScient  and  commanding  per- 
sonage, fond  of  rural  life  and  table  delicacies,  as  his  fre- 
quent retirem^it  to  a  place  famous  for  its  shellflBh  would 
prove. 

It  only  remains  to  refer  to  some  facts  which  add  com- 
plexity to  the  solution  of  the  Theodore  problem  in  general. 
One  is  the  confusing  him  with  a  certain  William  who 
flourished  in  Europe  contemporaneously  with  Theodore, 
and  who  seems  to  have  been  looked  on  in  the  light  of  a 
demi-god.  This  was  not  many  years  Iwfore  the  frightful 
cataclysm  which,  beginning  on  the  Pacific  coast  of  Amer- 
ica, moved  eastward,  carrying  destruction  to  the  vast  cities 
of  the  central  and  eastern  parts,  and,  reaching  Europe, 
decimated  its  population  ~  the  beginning  of  that  new  and 
grandest  civilization  which  has  arisen  in  Asia.  Kow  the 
fact  that  Theodore  was  at  one  time  in  William's  dominions, 
probably  gave  rise  to  the  confusion,  for  the  commanding 
personality  of  the  American  would  make  itself  felt,  and 
his  stay,  even  if  short,  might  have  given  rise  to  the  tradi- 
tion regarding  his  rule  as  William,  or  conjointly  with  him, 
in  William's  country. 

60,  too,  Theodore  has  been  confused  with  a  king  in  Eng- 
land. This  was  previous  to  the  invasion  of  that  land  by  a 
fierce  race  of  destroying  beings  called  "  Suffragettes."  The 
claim  that  these  were  women  is  discredited  by  Dr.  Kho 
because  wholly  contrary  to  the  character  of .  the  female 
sex  of  those  centuries,  since  we  know  that  the  women  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Jfotea  24d 

the  time  had  degenerated  physically  to  a  wasp-like  stature, 
ae  shown  by  the  colored  plates  representing  them,  and  se- 
cured by  deep-sea  diving  at  the  site  of  New  York.  The 
type  of  garments  worn  give  substantial  groonds  for  snp- 
posing  that  before  the  destruction  of  the  cities  the  climate 
had  become  remarkably  warm. 

All  these  points  will  be  found  satisfactorily  covered  in 
the  chapters  which  follow. 

After  a  thorough  sifting  of  all  the  evidence,  our  schol- 
arly author  concludes:  1.  That  such  a  person  as  Theodore 
lived;  2.  That  he  was  a  statesman,  and  for  a  time  presi- 
dent of  the  United  States;  3.  That  all  the  accumulations 
of  myths,  fables,  and  other  accretions  are  simply  tradi- 
tional corroborations  of  his  forceful  and  wide  influence 
and  popularity,  but  that  they  most  reverently  bat  posi- 
tively be  laid  aside. 

Y.  GOLA 

Lhasa  University 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


NOTICES  OF  RECENT  PUBLICATIONS 

The  History  op  Religions.     By  E.  Washburn  Hopkins, 
Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  .Sanskrit  aiid   Comparative 
Piiilology,  Yale  University.     8vo.     Pp.  624.     New  York: 
MacmlUan  Company.     Idl8.     $3.00. 
This  exceedingly  interesting  book  is  the  first  of  a  series 
on  the  scientific  study  of  religion  which  seems  likely  to 
be  of  the  greatest  value.     Several  of  those  to  follow  are 
advertised  as  the  work  of  well-known  ministers,  and  so 
they  will  presumably  defend  the  orthodox  view  of  revela- 
tion. The  work  before  us,  however,  surveys  the  whole  field 
of  religious  history  from  a  purely  external  standpoint: 
Christianity  is  the  Golden  Bough  of  a  great  tree  of  devel- 
oping faith  whose  roots  lie  deep  in  the  darkness  of  prime- 
val earth.    "  Virile  as  Mohammedanism,  gentle  as  Hindu- 
ism, catholic  as  Greek  mysticism,  ethical  as  Hebraism ;  it 
differs,  shall  we  eay,  in  surpassing;  or  is  that  to  prejudge 
the  case?"    This  is  the  point  of  view. 

In  e  general  way  the  work  covers  the  same  ground  as 
C.  P.  Tiele's  well-known  "  Outlines  of  the  History  of  Re- 
ligion," but,  as  we  should  expect  from  Professor  Hopkins, 
it  makes  the  fullest  use  of  more  recent  researches  all  over 
the  world.  It  is  a  most  scholarly  and  excellent  piece  of 
work,  probably  the  beat  book  on  the  subject  extant,  within 
the  limits  of  some  six  hundred  pages.  We  begin  with  some 
general  definitions  and  learn  the  more  outstanding  char- 
acteristics of  primitive  religion.  Then  we  read  about  the 
fetishes  and  idols  of  African  negroes,  about  the  religion  of 
Ainu  and  Mongol,  and  of  the  mana  and  taboo  of  the  gentle 
races  reared  by  the  southern  seas.  We  begin  to  rise  above 
the  ground  in  speaking  of  the  rdigion  of  the  American 
Indians ;  including  those  who  long  ago  on  tropic  highlands 
evolved  a  culture  of  such  passing  qnaintness.  In  the  pri- 
meval religions  of  Celts,  of  Slavs,  and  of  their  Teutonic 
masters,  we  get  very  little  up;  but  a  big  ascent  is  made 
in  the  next  chapter,  when  the  fair  land  of  India  is  reached. 
Among  the  very  best  are  the  three  chapters  that  trace  the 
wonderful  story  of  the  ancient  Hindus  with  their  Vedas, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Xoticcs  of  Recent  Publicationa  251 

of  the  noble  message  of  the  Buddha  that  ech.oed  as  far  as 
the  farthest  islands  of  Japan  and  the  remotest  highlands 
of  Central  Asia,  bringing  its  rest  and  its  peace  and  strong 
cirilization  too,  and  of  the  vagaries  of  modern  Hinduism. 
This  is  natural  from  the  author's  chair.  We  feel  a  little 
doubtful  whether  we  are  reallj  climbing  all  the  time  as 
we  snrrey  the  teachings  of  Lao-tse  and  Confucius,  and  all 
that  China  had  to  offer  in  the  way  of  religion  to  the  world. 
(Her  real  contribution  was  political.)  After  bearing  of 
Shinto  and  of  the  Japanese  modifications  of  Buddhism, 
we  feel  sure  we  are  slipping  a  little  down  the  tree  as  we 
read  of  ancient  Egypt  and  Assyria,  whose  faiths  are  rightly 
represented  as  repellently  material  and  perhaps  a  little 
coarse.  But  in  Zoroaster's  deep  wisdom  we  feel  that  we 
are  climbing  again,  and  in  the  great  things  Moses  taught 
we  feel  quite  sure.  As  we  go  on  to  read  of  the  fierce  faith 
of  Mohammed  we  know  that  we  are  slipping  or  almost 
falling  down,  and  in  the  crude  mythologies  of  Greece  and 
Rome  we  do  not  feel  that  we  are  getting  higher.  But  sud- 
denly among  the  branches  the  blue  sky  is  seen  above,  and 
with  very  startling  suddenness  we  are  standing  on  the 
golden  bough  that  crowns  the  tree ! 

The  account  of  Christianity  is  thoroughly  reverent,  but 
it  departs  entirely  from  the  standards  usually  called  or- 
thodox. Christ  stands  forth  simply  as  the  last  and  the 
greatest  of  the  moralists  who  have  done  so  much  to  mold 
the  world.  If  not  the  incarnate  son  of  God  he  rises  high 
alwve  the  other  sons  of  men.  Professor  Hopkins  rightly 
points  out  that  the  greatest  glory  of  Christian  history  is 
the  way  in  which  this  faith  has  again  and  again  "  through 
choking  accumulations  risen  ever  anew  the  water  of  life, 
fresh  from  its  fountain."  He  ends  with  the  noble  sentence : 
"  Hence  the  strength  of  Christianity.  In  it  divinity  blends 
with  humanity.  Moreover,  two  best  human  types,  the  moral 
and  the  spiritual,  not  artificially  joined  but  fundamentally 
blended,  two  ideals,  that  of  service  to  the  State,  that  of 
fullest  expression  of  the  individual,  have  in  Christianity 
been  made  one."  i.  c.  h. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


262  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

Prbhistobic  Bbugion  :  A  Study  in  Pre-Christian  An- 
tiquity. An  Examination  of  the  Beligioos  Beliefs  of 
the  Oceanic,  Central  African,  and  Amazonian  Primi- 
tives,  their  Development  among  the  Later  Indo-Asiatic 
and  Totemic  Peoples,  their  Interpretation  by  the  West- 
ern-Asiatic and  Caucasian  Races  of  Neolithic  Culture, 
and  their  Possible  Connexion  with  the  Earliest  Belig- 
ion  of  Mankind.  By  Philo  Laos  Hills,  8.T.L.  4to.  Pp. 
viii,  619.  Washington:  Capital  Pablishers,  Inc.  1918. 
flO.OO. 

As  an  antidote  to  the  wild  specnlations  which  for  a  half- 
century  have  been  current  respecting  the  capacity  of  prim- 
itive man,  this  volume  is  bi^y  to  be  commended.  It  is 
really  an  exhaustive  treatment  of  the  subject,  such  as  no 
other  student  has  given.  Every  statement  is  accompanied 
with  a  reference  to  the  authorities  upon  the  snbject,  and 
it  is  gratifying  to  note  that  its  conclnsions  accord  with 
those  of  Paul,  that  "  the  invisible  things  of  him  [Ood]  from 
the  Creation  of  the  world  are  clearly  seen,  being  under- 
stood by  the  things  that  are  made,  even  his  eternal  Power 
and  Godhead"  (Rom.  i.  20).  In  accordance  with  the  pre- 
vailing trend  of  opinion,  the  nearest  prototypes  of  primi- 
tive man  are  to  be  found  in  the  primitive  tribes  of  Africa, 
southeastern  Asia,  and  Australia.  But  even  here,  whm  one 
penetrates  beneath  the  sarface,  it  is  found  that  there  is  a 
profound  conception  in  their  minds  of  a  spiritual,  eternal, 
infinite,  good,  wise,  and  holy  being  who  is  the  creator  of 
all  things,  and  who  is  both  just  and  merciful.  This  propo- 
sition is  sustained  by  such  an  abundance  of  evidence  that 
it  cannot  well  be  disputed.  The  authors  who  have  attrib- 
uted these  ideas  to  the  influence  of  contact  with  Christian 
missionaries  are  shown  to  be  in  error.  The  volume  is  too 
large,  and  the  evid^ce  is  too  extended,  for  us  to  attnnpt 
a  summary.  But  we  commaid  the  volume  to  all  anthro- 
pological and  theological  students. '  It  is  a  volume  that 
cannot  be  ignored.  It  is  full  of  illnstrationa  of  great  value, 
and  the  treatment  of  subsidiary  questions,  such  as  that  of 
the  universality  of  the  flood,  is  Judicial  and  in  the  main 
satisfactory. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  253 

Essays  on  the  Eably  History  of  the  Church  aj4d  thd 

Ministry.    By  various  writers.    Edited  by  H.  B.  Swhth,  . 

D.D.    8vo.     Pp.    XX,   «6.     New   York:    Tlie   MacmUIan 

Company.     1918.    ?3.00. 

The  genesis  of  this  book  is  decidedly  interesting.  In  a 
sermon  preached  l>efore  the  University  of  Cambridge,  Eng- 
land, in  1910,  Dp.  Wilson,  Canon  of  Worcester,  appealed 
for  a  fresh  examination  of  the  questions  which  "  gather 
round  the  origin  and  early  development  of  Episcopacy  and 
the  nature  and  degree  of  the  sanction  which  it  possesses." 
The  real  purposes  intended  by  the  preacher  were  to  ascer- 
tain whether  there  is  any  warrant  from  history  for  regard- 
ing the  Episcopal  Churches  as  so  exclusively  branches  of 
the  Catholic  Church  that  there  can  be  no  recognition  of 
non-Epiacopal  bodies  as  true  branches,  whether  an  Epis- 
copal communion  is  the  only  definitely  commissioned  fel- 
lowship, and  whether  all  others  have  their  ministry"  and 
sacraments  from  human  appointments.  The  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  influenced  by  this  appeal,  suggested  that 
"  it  would  be  opportune  to  collect  and  state  the  latest  re- 
sults of  scholarly  research  bearing  on  the  subject."  This 
volume  is  the  result.  It  contains  six  essays :  "  Conceptions 
of  the  Church  in  Early  Times "  by  Canon  Mason ;  "  The 
Christian  Ministry  in  the  Apostolic  and  sub-Apostolic 
Periods "  by  Dr.  Armitage  Robinson ;  "Apostolic  Succes- 
sion "  by  Dr.  C.  H.  Turner ;  "  The  Cyprianic  Doctrine  of 
the  Ministry"  by  Dr.  J.  H.  Bernard,  Archbishop  of  Dub- 
lin ;  "  Early  Forms  of  Ordination  "  by  Dr.  W.  H.  Frere ; 
"  Terms  of  Communion  and  the  Ministration  of  the  Sacra- 
ments in  Early  Times "  by  Dr.  F.  E.  Brightman.  They 
are  all  by  one  type  of  scholar,  representing  the  definite 
High  Church  position.  It  is,  of  course,  quite  impossible 
to  discuss  the  many  points  raised  by  these  essays,  and  it 
must  suffice  to  call  attention  to  a  few  of  the  more  import- 
ant aspects.  The  essay  by  Dr.  Armitage  Robinson  confirms 
Lighttoofs  theory  as  to  the  development  of  the  ministry. 
This  is  a  striking  and  significant  result,  showing  that 
Lighttoofs  epoch-making  essay,  though  written  so  long 
ago,  is  still  essentially  true  and  holds  the  field.    It  will  be 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


251  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

remembered  bow,  among  other  tbings,  that  great  scholar 
maititained  that  Christianity  knows  notbing  of  a  Sacer- 
dotal system  and  that  tbe  element  of  Sacerdotalism  came 
Into  the  Christian  ministry  through  Cyprian.  The  longest 
and,  in  some  retfpects,  the  most  important  essay  is  the  one 
on  "Apostolic  Succession  "  by  Dr.  C.  H.  Tamer,  and  its 
great  interest  is  that  it  gives  apparently  all  that  a  learned 
High  Church  Anglican  can  adduce  in  support  of  the  posi- 
tion. The  first  part  deals  with  tbe  original  idea  of  Apostolic 
SnccessioD  and  shows  that  the  emphasis  was  on  Succession 
as  a  guarantee  of  orthodox  doctrine.  In  opposition  to  the 
Gnostics,  who  claimed  to  possess  an  Apostolic  tradition, 
Ireneeus  and  Tertullian  maintained  that  only  in  Churches 
founded  by  Apostles  and  continued  through  a  line  of  Bish- 
ops could  the  true  teaching  be  found.  And  so,  doctrine 
was  Apostolic  when  it  was  in  harmony  with  that  held  in 
Apostolic  Sees.  Tbe  emphasis  therefore  lay  on  orthodoxy, 
not  on  the  administration  of  sacraments,  the  Bisbop  be- 
ing responsibic  for  doctrine  not  because  be  happened  to 
be  a  Bisbop,  but  because  he  was  at  work  in  a  place  where 
an  Apostle  bad  lived  and  taught.  It  will  be  seen  that  the 
question  tben  was  not  as  to  the  validi^  of  bis  Orders  or 
the  fact  of  sacramental  grace.  This  puts  the  discussion 
in  a  very  different  place  from  that  in  which  it  is  found 
to-day.  Later  on,  other  questions  arose,  especially  in  con- 
nection with  heretical  and  schismatic  Baptism  and  Orders, 
and  in  regard  to  these  matters  Dr.  Turner  points  out  that 
Cyprian  and  Augustine  took  quite  opposite  lines,  and  he 
shows  bow  it  was  largely  due  to  Augustine  that  the  later 
doctrines  of  Apostolic  Succession  became  prevalent.  His 
words  about  tbe  modem  idea  are  particularly  significant. 
He  says  that  it  "  may  possibly  be  justified  as  a  logical  re- 
sult of  asserting  the  validity  of  non-Catholic  Orders,  but 
it  was  at  least  a  novel  departure  and  must  be  frankly  rec- 
ognized as  such.  Whether  it  was  wholly  a  good  departure 
may  be  doubted :  certainly  the  more  modem  view  is  often 
so  phrased  that  it  seems  to  lend  color  to  a  mechanical  con- 
ception of  the  Sacraments,  a  danger  from  wbicb  the  pa- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  .Notices  of  Recent  Publications  255 

tristic  view  is  wholly  free."  It  is  somewhat  disappointiBg 
that  Dr.  Turner  does  Dot  afford  any  distinct  light  on  the 
bearing  of  the  ancient  view  upon  the  modem  theory,  but 
it  is  obvious  that  continuity  of  doctrine  is  something  alto- 
gether different  from  the  modem  theory  and  really  tends 
to  support  the  Protestant  view  that  the  eeaeutial  fea- 
ture is  the  preservation  of  the  faith  "once  delivered  to 
the  saints."  Bo  also  in  regard  to  his  treatment  of  "non- 
Catholic  Orders  "  which  forms  the  second  part  of  his  paper. 
It  would  have  been  a  genuine,  help  to  have  had  from  so 
able  and  learned  a  scholar  an  account  of  the  definite  rela- 
tion of  those  early  days  when  the  chief  concern  was  for  the 
parity  of  the  faith,  to  the  modem  question  of  Episcopal 
versus  non-Episcopal  Ordination, 

It  was  inevitable  that  in  a  discussion  of  the  Church  and 
Ministry  in  the  early  centuries  Cyprian  would  have  a 
prominent  place,  but  Dr.  Bernard  does  not  shake  or  even 
really  touch  Ligbtfoot's  contention  about  the  essential 
Sacerdotalism  and,  therefore,  the  essential  novelty  of  Cyp- 
rian's view.  The  other  essays  do  not  call  for  detailed 
attention,  mainly  because  they  are  technical.  "WhUe  the 
book  is  able,  learned,  and  thorough,  it  must  be  confessed 
that  Dr.  Wilson's  appeal  is  not  really  answered  by  the 
material  here  provided.  The  essayists,  as  they  aU  be- 
long to  one  school,  assume,  though  without  any  war- 
rant, that  from  the  outset  there  was  a  definite  ideal  of 
Church  organization  and  that  this  organization  was  ab- 
solutely essential  for  the  continuing  presence  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  But  it  need  hardly  be  said  that  no  such  position 
can  be  proved  either  from  the  New  Testament  or  from  the 
earliest  centuries.  No  one  really  doubts  the  fact  of  suc- 
cession as  a  mere  matter  of  historical  continuity ;  but  it  is 
quite  another  thing  to  maintain  the  fundamental  necessity 
of  Episcopacy  as  though  it  were  as  important  as  some  of  the 
fundamental  doctrinal  realities  concerning  Christ.  Those 
who  accept  Episcopacy  as  the  best  form  of  Church  Govern- 
ment and  believe  it  to  be  of  the  lene  esse  of  the  Church  have 
ample  ground  for  their  position,  but  to  go  further  and  main- 
Vol.  UCXVI.    No.  802.    8 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


256  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

tain  an  exclusive  Episcopacy  is  to  adopt  a  position  which  is 
neither  Scriptural  nor  historical  and  certainly  is  entirely 
opposed  to  some  of  the  plainest  proofs  of  the  Spirit's  pres- 
ence and  blessing  in  non-Episcopal  Churches  to-day.  Just 
before  this  book  came  out,  a  good  deal  of  attention  was 
paid  to  a  declaration  by  Dr.  Sanday  that  tbis  volume  when 
it  appeared  would  justify  and  practically  reestablish  the 
old  view  of  Apostolic  Succession.  But  now  that  the  work 
is  in  our  bauds,  it  is  impossible  to  find  an;  traces  of  the 
evidence  on  which  Dr.  Sanday  founded  his  statement.  It 
this  is  all  that  the  High  Anglican  theory  can  sa;  for  itself, 
there  is  far  less  material  in  history  than  many  people  have 
thought,  and  the  view  is  much  weaker  than  many  have  im- 
agined. It  is  impossible  to  avoid  the  conclusion  that  the 
writers  of  this  book  have,  as  it  has  been  well  said,  read  into 
primitive  Episcopacy  mncb  that  is  of  a  later  growth.  It 
is  simple  truth  to  say  that  the  book  with  all  its  undoubted 
ability  leaves  the  ordinary  Protestant  view  entirely  un- 
touched, and  it  is  impossible  for  the  extreme  High  Church 
party  to  be  satisfied  with  the  contentions  here  put  forth. 
One  thing  is  perfectly  certain,  the  book  serves  to  empha- 
size afresh  the  fact  that  there  is  a  fundamental  difFereiA% 
between  two  views  of  Episcopacy  now  held  in  the  Church  of 
England.  According  to  one.  Episcopacy  is  necessary  to  the 
existence  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  This  means  that  Episco- 
pacy possesses  divine  right  and  that  all  non-Episcopal 
organizations  are  outside  the  pale  of  "  covenanted  se- 
curity." The  other  view  maintains  that  Episcopacy  be- 
longs to  very  early  times,  was  universally  accepted  from 
the  second  to  the  sixteenth  century,  has  proved  itself  by 
experience  to  be,  on  the  whole,  the  best  for  practical  pur- 
poses and  now  after  all  these  centuries  constitutes  a  trust 
which  cannot  fairly  he  relinquished.  These  two  theories 
obviously  differ  fundamentally,  and  until  Episcopalians 
settle  which  of  the  two  is  correct,  they  must  not  expect 
non-Episcopalians  to  entertain  serioosly  the  question  of 
Beunion.  The  book  will,  of  course,  take  its  place  among 
those  that  will  need  to  be  studied  in  connection  with  these 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  257 

great  and  pressing  problems,  for  it  deserves,  on  account 
of  its  authorship  and  merits,  the  most  thorough  and  care- 
ful attention,  bat  it  must  be  confessed  that  it  does  not 
really  further  the  settlement  of  some  of  our  most  pressing 
modem  problems. 

W.  H.  Griffith  Thomas 
Toronto,  Ontario 

The  Rbligious  Teachino  op  the  Old  Testament.  By  Al- 
bert C.  Knudson,  Professor  in  Boston  University  School 
of  Theology.  8vo.  Pp.  416.  New  York :  The  Abingdon 
Press.    1918.    $2.50,  net. 

A  perusal  of  this  volume  ia  most  disappointing  and  de- 
pressing. From  the  author's  references  it  would  seem 
that  he  ought  to  have  known  the  character  of  many  of 
his  statements,  which  will  seriously  mislead  the  public 
for  which  he  writes.  For  the  long  controversy  about  the 
Pentateuch  has  now  reached  a  stage  at  which  it  is  no 
longer  possible  for  any  writer  who  claims  to  be  up  to  date 
simply  to  pnt  before  his  public  the  exploded  conclusions 
of  the  Astmc-Kuenen-Wellliausen  school  as  the  last  word 
of  scholarship.  Wellhausen  himself  knew  that  they  were 
untenable  before  he  died.  So  far  as  1  am  aware,  the  last 
utterance  of  his  on  the  subject  which  he  permitted  to  be 
published,  was  his  statement  to  Dahse  (Textkritische  Ma- 
terialien  zur  Hexateuchfrage,  vol.  i.  p.  116),  that  the 
latter  had  dealt  with  the  sore  point  of  the  documentary 
theory;  and,  whatever  may  be  the  case  with  the  lesser 
lights  of  the  school,  he,  at  any  rate,  had  enough  intelli- 
gence to  realize  that  if  the  documents  never  existed,  the 
dating  of  those  documents  could  not  possibly  be  correct. 
Tet  Enudson  writes  (p.  25) :  '  The  assumption  of  the  Mo- 
saic origin  of  the  Law  throws  no  light  on  the  historical  and 
prophetic  books.  "  On  the  contrary,"  says  Wellhausen, 
"  my  enjoyment  of  the  latter  was  marred  by  the  Law ;  it 
did  not  bring  them  any  nearer  me,  but  intruded  itself  on- 
easily,  like  a  ghost  that  makes  a  noise  indeed,  but  is  not 
visible  and  really  effects  nothing." '  If  Wellhausen's  opin- 
ion ia  to  be  quoted  at  all,  reliance  should  be  placed  on  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


258  BibHotheca  Sacra  [AprU, 

foUj  matured  view  that  he  expressed  at  the  end  of  his  life, 
and  not  on  the  impressions  he  formed  as  a  raw  theological 
student,  or  in  the  later  days  when,  without  any  adequate 
textual  foundation,  he  bad  the  incredible  assurance  to  re- 
write the  history  of  Israel  on  the  basis  of  his  inability  to 
discriminate  between  a  mound  and  a  house  once  he  bad 
called  them  both  sanctuaries.^  Knudson  himself  is  still 
in  this  condition.  He  has  no  idea  that  a  cairn  is  not  a 
house  and  cannot  be  converted  into  one  by  the  process  of 
calling  it  a  sanctuary;  nor  does  he  realize  that  the  book 
of  the  covenant  and  the  early  history  show  exactly  the 
same  position  for  the  House  in  the  ritual  worship  as  does 
Deuteronomy.  Now,  of  course,  it  may  be  said  that  it  is 
too  much  to  expect  of  any  higher  critical  professor  that 
he  should  read  both  sides  od  bis  subject  or  be  capable  of 
distinguishing  between  a  mound  and  a  house;  and  if  that 
be  Professor  EJiudson's  own  view  of  his  capacities,  as  his 
practice  would  certainly  seem  to  show,  there  is  nothing 
more  to  be  said  on  that  score.  But  with  respect  to  the  doc- 
umentary theory  it  is  impossible  to  rest  content  with  this 
view.  Knudson  cannot  claim  to  have  been  ignorant  of  the 
existence  of  the  "  International  Standard  Bible  Encyclo- 
paedia "  and  the  work  of  Eerdmans,  Dahee,  SchlOgl,  and 
the  very  numerous  textual  school,  for  he  was  actually  a 
contributor  to  the  first-named  publication,  and  he  states 
in  the  preface  that  he  nsed  the  advance  sheets  of  Bright- 
man's  "  Sources  of  the  Hexateuch."  A  critical  note  deal- 
ing with  that  volume  appeared  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra 
for  October,  1918,  to  which  the  reader  is  referred  for 
further  information.  Here  the  point  is  that  B^nudson 
must  have  had  a  very  considerable,  if  inadequate,  idea  of 
the  position,  and  yet  repeats  the  old  J,  E,  P  business  with 
the  words  '  Scholars  are  now  quite  generally  agreed  that 
the  Pentateuch  ...  is  made  up  of  four  main  documents ' 
(p.  26).  The  'agreement'  is  now  such  that  in  two  of  the 
'See  TbeologlBcb  TlJdBchrlft,  1913,  pp.  19S-S0T;  International 
Standard  Bible  Encyclopaedia,  ».vv.  "Altar,"  "  Saciiflce,"  "  Sanct- 
uary"; EBsaya  In  Pentateuchal  CrltlclBin,  chap,  vl.;  Pentateuchal 
Studies  paitivi. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  259 

three  state  uuiverBities  of  Holland,  as  well  as  in  the  Free 
CTnivereity  of  Amsterdam,  it  is  taught  that  the  Pentateuch 
is  not  so  made  up;  while  in  the  third  it  is  treated  as  an 
open  question.  True,  Holland  is  somewhat  in  advance  of 
the  rest  of  the  Continent;  but  for  years  before  the  war 
Schldgl  had  been  teaching  in  Vienna  that  the  theory  could 
not  be  maintained,  Wellhausen  had  abandoned  it,  and  vari- 
ous other  German  professors  had  felt  compelled  to  trim 
and  modify  their  positions  (The  Expositor,  Dec.  1913,  p. 
481).  In  Great  Britain  Professor  Witton  Da  vies  is,  so  far 
as  I  know,  the  only  leading  critic  who  has  pubUcly  re- 
nounced his  earlier  faith  in  Wellbausenism.  But  the  em- 
phasis is  on  the  "  publicly,"  for  my  correspondence  shows 
me  that  he  does  not  stand  alone  in  the  Universities.  Readers 
of  this  Review  are  familiar  with  the  mediating  positions 
that  Professors  Schmidt  and  Olmstead  have  sought  to  oc- 
cupy in  America. 

No  doubt  there  are  students  who  try  to  persuade  them- 
selves that  Astruc's  clue  can  be  abandoned  to  some  extent, 
and  that  the  documentary  theory  may  yet  be  maintained 
almost  intact.  This  is,  however,  an  impossible  attitude 
for  two  reasons.  As  Dalise  shows  by  five  solid  pages  of 
quotations  from  Gnnkel  and  Skinner  (op.  cit.,  pp.  116-121), 
the  analysis  in  Genesis  very  largely  depends  on  this;  in- 
deed, as  Steuemagel  said  in  1910,  it  is  still  used  as  a  main 
criterion.  Nor  has  textual  criticism  confined  itself  to 
proving  the  futility  of  the  clue  in  Genesis.  It  has  gone 
further  and  shown  that  the  word  Baal  was  originally  com- 
mon in  many  of  the  Old  Testament  Books,  and  that  in  the 
Divine  names  and  other  matters  the  Old  Testament  has 
been  edited  to  accord  with  textual  riews  based  on  certain 
verses  of  Scripture  and  other  theological  conceptions.* 
Secondly,  the  idea  that  only  this  one  criterion  has  been 
shown  to  be  worthless  is  thoroughly  false,  as  the  readers 
of  this  Beview  know,  and  they  are  well  aware  of  the  ina- 

'  See  TbeologlBcb  Tljdscbrlft,  191S,  pp.  164-169;  Southern  Metbo- 
dlflt  Quarterly  Review,  April,  1918,  pp.  179-190;  Bibllotheca  Sacra, 
Oct.  1914  up  to  and  including  tlie  present  Issue. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


260  Bibliotheca  Bacra  [April, 

bilit;  of  leading  members  of  the  school  to  defend  an;  of 
Wellhansen's  positions. 

It  is  not  necesaaiy  to  deal  with  this  t)Ook  in  detail,  for 
a  writer  who  deliberately  takes  up  the  position  that  he 
cannot  be  expected  to  pay  any  attention  to  the  distinction 
between  a  hoose  and  a  mound,  or  to  the  influential  and 
growing  textual  school,  or  even  to  the  mature  opinion  of 
bia  own  leader,  has  no  claim  to  be  treated  as  a  responsible 
scholar.  But  for  the  protection  of-  those  who  may  use  the 
book,  one  other  point  may  be  mentioned.  Professor  Knud- 
son's  whole  view  of  the  origin  of  monotheism  and  the  higher 
religions  ideas  of  the  Pentateuch  is  utterly  unhiatorical. 
Id  the  near  future  I  hope  to  publish  in  this  Beriew  a  study 
of  the  religion  of  Moses  based  on  a  number  of  facts  the 
very  existence  of  which  is  unsuspected  by  our  professor, 
and  my  readers  will  then  be  able  to  examine  into  the  mat- 
ter for  thems^ves.  At  present  I  pass  over  these  questions 
because  it  is  undesirable  to  quote  important  evidence  for 
the  first  time  in  this  connection  at  insufficient  length. 

If  Professor  B^nudson  wishes  to  write  a  good  book  in  the 
future,  it  will  be  necessary  for  him  to  work  on  very  differ- 
ent lines.  He  must  submit  to  the  mental  discipline  of 
thoroughly  studying  both  sides  on  every  question :  he  must 
take  the  trouble  of  mastering  the  distinction  between  a 
house  and  a  mound  in  all  its  implications  and  also  all  the 
other  elementary  distinctions  which  Wellhausen  and  hia 
disciples  have  been  too  muddled  to  observe :  he  must  make 
a  careful  firsthand  collection  of  all  the  material  facts  from 
the  Old  Testament  itself;  and  be  must  learn  to  practice 
scientific  textual  criticism  and  the  comparative  method. 
If  he  will  do  these  things  and  then  have  the  courage  to 
tell  the  truth,  the  whole  truth,  and  nothing  but  the  truth, 
on  all  the  topics  with  which  be  deals,  without  regard  to 
whether  it  is  fashionable  or  the  reverse  in  professorial  cir- 
cles, be  will  achieve  something  for  scholarship.  He  is  not 
lacking  in  ability. 

Harold  M.  Wikner 

London,  England 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  FubUcatiom  261 

The  Rbligion  and  Thisology  of  Paul.  The  Kerr  Lectures 
delivered  in  tlie  United  Free  Oharch  College,  Glasgow, 
during  Session  1914-15.  By  W.  Moboan^  D.D.,  Professor 
of  Systematic  Theology  and  Apologetics  in  Queen's  The- 
ological College,  Kingston,  Canada.  8vo.  Pp.  xi,  272. 
Edinburgh;  T.  and  T.  Clark.  1917. 
This  volume  consists  of  two  parts:  Part  I.  treats  of 
"  The  Redeemer  and  His  Redemption,"  and  Part  II.,  of 
"  The  Life  in  Salvation."  Throughout,  the  presentation  is 
complete,  and  all  the  passages  of  Paul's  writings  are  can- 
didly and  carefully  considered  in  their  bearing  both  upon 
the  character  and  work  of  Christ  as  portrayed  in  the  four 
Gospels,  and  in  their  relation  to  Christian  creeds.  But 
the  Epistle  to  the  Ephesians  was  not  used  as  an  indepen- 
dent source,  nor  were  the  Pastoral  Epistles.  Throughout 
the  work  the  references  are  chiefly  to  German  authorities, 
who  are  given  a  weight  which  would  not  be  granted  them 
after  the  developments  in  connection  with  them  r^^arding 
the  world  war.  But  in  the  main  the  author's  independence 
is  manifest,  and  orthodox  interpretations  characterize  the 
argument.  The  question  of  Paul's  acquaintance  with  the 
life  of  Christ  portrayed  in  the  Gospels  is  treated  with  great 
skill.  "  The  solution  of  the  problem  we  believe  to  be  this, 
that  he  was  a  thousand  times  more  indebted  to  the  earthly 
Jesus  than  he  knew.  Directly  and  indirectly,  through  the 
tradition  of  Jesus'  life  and  words  and  through  lives  that 
were  epistles  of  Jesus,  the  spirit  and  principles  of  the  Mas- 
ter had  access  to  his  mind  and  soul.  Received  and  assim- 
ilated, they  reappeared  in  his  consciousness,  altered  in 
form  doubtless  and  stamped  with  his  own  individuality, 
under  the  guise  of  divine  revelations.  It  is  no  disparage- 
ment of  his  revelations  to  treat  them  as  psychologically 
mediated,  and  to  trace  them  to  a  source  of  wbich  he  was 
himself  only  half  aware"  (p.  39). 

The  doctrine  of  Christ's  person  is  very  satisfactorily 
treated  in  the  second  chapter.  "  The  introduction  of  Christ- 
worship  and  of  the  Kyrios-title  "  by  Paul  was  not  original 
with  him,  but  was  the  adoption  of  a  conception  of  Christ 
held  by  "the  Church  in  general,"  in  which  James,  Peter, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


262  Bibliotheca  Socro  [April, 

and  Barnabas  were  at  one  vith  bim.  "  It  U  abundantly 
clear  that  in  the  Epistles  of  Paul  we  are  (ace  to  face  with 
a  fully  developed  Christ  worship.  Christ  has  gathered  to 
Himself  the  functions  of  Deity  and  become  an  object  of 
religious  homage"  (p.  15).  Regarding  Justification,  the 
author  holds  that  "  Paul's  doctrine  of  justification  by  faith 
with  its  correlate  the  doctrine  of  redemption  from  the  Law 
was  a  creation  of  his  own,  none  of  his  doctrines  more  dis- 
tinctly so  " ;  but  "  with  respect  to  the  spirit  embodied  in 
it,  its  essential  religious  content,  it  was  not  new,  but  takes 
us  back  to  Jesus  and  to  the  Hebrew  prophets  and  psalm- 
ists.  .  .  .  The  essential  import  of  Paul's  doctrine  Is  all  con- 
tained in  the  two  parables  of  the  Pharisee  and  the  publican 
and  the  servant  coming  in  from  the  field"  (pp.  154 f.). 

The  section  on  "  The  Consummation  "  is  so  indefinite  that 
one  cannot  tell  whether  he  is  a  premillenarian  or  not;  but 
it  is  worthy  of  being  studied  by  all  parties.  The  closing 
chapter,  on  Paul  and  Jesus,  is  of  special  value,  though  it 
is  doubtful  if  he  gives  to  Paul's  interpretations  of  Chris- 
tianity all  the  weight  that  belongs  to  them. 

Thk  Coming  op  the  Loro:  Will  it  be  Premillennial  ?  By 
James  H.  Snowden,  D.D,,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  System- 
atic Theology  in  the  Western  Theological  Seminary,  Pitts- 
burgh, Pa. ;  author  of  "  The  World  a  Spiritual  System : 
An  Outline  of  Metaphysics,"  "  The  Basic  Beliefs  of 
Christianity,"  "  The  Psychology  of  Religion,"  "  Can  We 
Believe  in  Immortality?"  etc.  8vo.  Pp.  ixi,  288.  New 
York:  The  Macmillan  Company.    1919.    fl.75. 

Thb  Skcond  Coming  op  Christ  :  A  Message  for  the  Times. 
By  Jambs  M.  Campbell.     16mo.     Pp.  136.     New  York: 
The  Methodist  Book  Concern.    1919.    60  cents,  net. 
Naturally  the  European  war,  whose  disastroiis  effects 
the  combined  wisdom  of  the  world  is  endeavoring  to  coun- 
teract, has  given  new  vogue  to  the  premillenarian  theory 
of  the  coming  of  Christ.    The  rosy  views  of  the  progress  of 
civilization  through  the  spread  of  education,  and  through 
the  increase  of  material  production  to  satisfy  the  physical 
wants  of  mankind,  have  been  sadly  dissipated  by  the  re- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publicatiom  263 

crudeacence  of  aavagery  which  the  world  has  witnessed 
throiigh  the  last  fonr  years.  Dr.  Snowden  strives  hard  to 
continue  to  cherish  these  anticipations,  but  in  doing  so  he 
makes  strong  demands  npon  our  blind  faith  in  the  power, 
wisdom,  and  goodness  of  Qod.  Still  this  may  be  a  virtue 
and  not  a  vice.  He  makes  a  strong  case  for  postmillenari- 
anism  in  the  presentation  of  bis  principles  of  Biblical  in- 
terpretation, supporting  what  has  been  the  prevalent  view 
of  the  Church  and  of  Biblical  scholars.  He  maintains  that 
his  view  is  based  on  a  broad  interpretation  of  Scripture; 
that  the  Old  Testament  is  fulfilled  in  the  New;  that  the 
kingdom  of  God  is  essentially  a  spiritual  kingdom  sub- 
jected to  gradual  growth,  like  that  of  the  seed  or  the  morn- 
ing dawn ;  that  there  are  various  forms  of  the  Lord's  coming 
—  in  judgment  and  Providence,  in  bis  Spirit,  and  to  the 
believer  in  death;  that  it  is  not  Jndaistic,  as  the  premil- 
lenarian  view  seems  to  be;  that  it  is  optimistic,  wholesome, 
and  fruitful  in  results,  and  has  history  and  scholarship  on 
its  side.  It  is  a  book  for  the  times,  and  deserves  the  atten- 
tion of  those  whose  views  it  contravenes. 

Dr.  Campbell's  brief  treatment  of  the  subject  is  to  the 
same  effect.  Specifically  he  maintains  that  Christ's  second 
coming  took  place  at  the  end  of  the  Jewish  economy,  which 
is  called  the  world,  and  which  is  partially  signalized  by 
the  events  on  the  day  of  Pentecost,  though  be  would  clearly 
distinguish  the  presence  of  Christ  in  the  world  from  that 
of  the  Holy  Spirit. 

Dictionary  op  the  Apostolic  Church.  Edited  by  James 
Hastings,  D.D.  With  the  Assistance  of  John  A.  Selbii, 
D.D.,  and  John  C.  Lamheet,  D.D.  Volume  II.  Mace- 
DONiA-ZioN,  with  Indexes.  4to.  Pp.  xil,  724.  New  York : 
Charles  Scribner's  Sons ;  Edinburgh :  T.  and  T.  Clark. 
1918.    16.00,  net. 

The  favorable  opinion  which  we  expressed  of  the  first 
volume  of  this  Dictionary  was  none  too  strong,  and  is  fujiy 
sustained  by  this,  which  completes  the  work  there  begun 
(see  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  April,  1916).  One  hundred  and 
six  scholars  of  world-wide  reputation  (largely  English,  but 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


264  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [April, 

with  a  goodly  number  American)  have  contiibated  to  it 
Among  the  Americans  are  Professors  Beckwith,  of  Chicago 
Theological  Seminary;  Case,  of  the  Univeraity  of  Chicago; 
Falconer,  of  the  University  of  Toronto;  Gordon,  of  McQill 
University ;  Groton,  of  the  Divinity  School  of  the  Protest- 
ant Episcopal  Church  in  Philadelphia ;  Hooke,  of  Victoria 
College,  Toronto;  Lake,  of  Harvard  University;  Law,  of 
Knox  College,  Toronto;  A.  T.  Robinson,  of  the  Southern 
Baptist  Theological  Seminary,  Louisville,  Ey.;  G.  L.  Rob- 
inson, of  McCormich  Theological  Seminary,  Chicago;  Shaw, 
of  the  Presbyterian  College,  Halifax,  N.  S. ;  Vos  and  War- 
field,  of  Princeton  Theological  Seminary. 

So  elaborate  are  the  main  articles  that  the  Dictionary 
becomes  a  library  in  itself.  Thirteen  double-column  quarto 
pages  are  devoted  to  "  Mysteries,"  by  W.  M.  Groton ;  eleven, 
to  "  Name,"  by  P.  A,  Gordon  Clark ;  six,  to  "  Odes  of  Sol- 
omon," by  A.  Mingana;  six,  to  "  Parousia,"  by  S.  H.  Hooke; 
twenty,  to  "  Paul,"  by  James  Stalker ;  sixteen,  to  "  Perse- 
cution," by  T.  Lewis ;  twenty,  to  "  Peter,"  and  his  Epistles, 
by  S.  J.  Case ;  ten,  to  the  "  Epistle  to  the  Philippians,"  by 
D.  Mackenzie ;  seven,  to  "  Redemption,"  by  B.  B.  Warfleld ; 
thirty-six,  to  "Resurrection  of  Christ,"  by  J,  M.  Shaw; 
twenty-two,  to  "  Righteousness,"  by  James  Moffatt ;  six, 
to  "  Roads  and  Travel,"  by  A.  Souter;  fourteen,  to  "  Sibyl- 
line Oracles,"  by  James  Moffatt ;  ten,  to  "  Epistles  to  Tim- 
othy and  Titns,"  by  R.  A.  Falconer;  ten,  to  "Trade  and 
Commerce,"  by  A.  Souter;  and  twenty-seven,  to  "War,"  by 
James  Moffatt. 

In  general,  the  articles  are  written  from  a  fairly  conser- 
vative point  of  view,  much  more  so  than  were  many  of  the 
articles  in  "  The  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,"  published  nearly 
twenty  years  ago.  This  is  especially  noticeable  in  the  arti- 
cles on  the  "  Resurrection  of  Christ "  and  "  Scripture." 
Though,  as  might  be  expected.  Professor  Case  rejects  the 
authenticity  of  Second  Peter,  and  is  doubtful  about  that 
of  First  Peter,  the  ailments  on  the  other  side  are  briefly 
stated. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  265 

The  Conscience  and  CoxcEeeiONs:  How  Ma;  the  Individ- 
ual Become  Related  to  the  Many?  Bj  Alfred  Williams 
Anthony,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Executive  Secretary  of  the  Home 
Missions  Conncil.     8vo.     Pp.  270.     New  York:  Fleming 
H.  Revell  Ck)mpany.    1918.    fl.50,  net. 
This  volume  is  largely  a  collection  of  lectures,  given  in 
Montreal  and  in  Hartford  Seminary,  on  "  The  Church  and 
Social  Service  "  and  "  The  Conscience  and  Federation,"  and 
ie  replete  with  practical  suggestions  growing  out  of  the 
author's  long  experience.  OccasionaUy,  however,  the  author 
slips  into  unguarded  assertions  upon  doctrinal  theology, 
which  are  to  be  deplored;  as,  for  instance,  in  his  remarks 
on  inherent  goodness,  where  he  says,  "  We  do  not  believe 
in  the  total  depravity  of  man;  we  believe  in  his  inherent 
goodness  ...  we  call  men  '  liars,'  when  probably  they  teU 
the  truth  more  than  ninety  times  out  of  a  hundred.  ...  So 
with  almost  any  crime  or  sin  in  the  entire  category.    Men 
are   not   constantly   sinning,   or   committing   crime "  (pp. 
137 f.).    Bat  the  Bible  says,  "The  plowing  of  the  wicked 
is   Bin "    (A.    v.).     Underneath    these    secondary    choices, 
which  may  or  may  not  be  right  in  themselves,  there  is  an 
ultimate  choice  of  the  will  which  stamps  the  roan  as  a 
saint  or  a  sinner.    This  light  view  of  the  nature  of  sin 
vitiates  most  of  his  argumentation. 

The   Aposxlbs'  Creed  in   the  Twentieth   Cbntuet.     By 
Ferdinand  S.  Schbnck,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Professor  of  Preach- 
ing and  Sociology  in  the  Theological  Seminary  at  New 
Brunswick,  N.  J.     12nio.     Pp.  212.     Chicago:  Fleming 
H.  Revell  Company.     1919.    $1.25,  net. 
This  is  a  sample  of  preaching  quite  as  much  as  a  doc- 
trinal study.    It  is  intended  to  show  the  young  men  pre- 
paring tor  the  ministry  how  doctrinal  subjects  should  be 
handled  in  the  pulpit.    In  a  book  written  for  that  purpose, 
we  need  not  look  for  original  thinking,  but  primarily  for 
method  of  presentation. 

This  book  is  an  admirable  example  of  what  doctrinal 
preaching  should  be.  And  yet  one  would  like  to  feel  that 
preaching  like  this  might  be  popular.  This  is  an  intensely 
practical  age,  and  the  problems  of  a  world  which  saw  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


266  BibUotheca  Sacra 

development  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  are  so  different  from 
the  problems  of  the  world  of  to-daj,  that  it  will  require 
more  cleverness  than  even  this  author  possesses  to  make 
doctrinal  preaching  of  interest  to  the  crowds. 

Nevertheless,  a  book  like  this  is  worth  while.  It  does 
reveal  sources  of  Christian  faith  and  character  to  which 
"the  world  ought  never  to  become  strange.  n.  t.  d.  p. 

Pan-Prussianism  :  Its  Methods  and  Its  Fruits.  By  Charles 
William  Super,  Ph.D.,  LL.D.,  Ex-President  of  Ohio  Uni- 
versity; sometime  ProfesBOr  of  Greek  and  Dean  of  the 
College  of  Liberal  Arts  Ibidem;  translator  of  Weil's  "  Or- 
der of  Words";  author  of  a  "History  of  the  German 
lianguage,"    "Between    Heathenism    and    Christianity," 
"A  Liberal  Education,"  "  German  Idealism  and  Prussian 
Militarism,"  etc.   12mo.   Pp.  306.  New  York:  The  Neale 
Publishing  Company,    1918,    fl.25,  net. 
So  far  as  we  know,  nothing  has  appeared  in  print  which 
gives  so  complete  and  unanswerable  a  verdict  in  condem- 
nation of  Prussian  principles,  aims,  and  activities  as  is 
done  in  this  volume.    This  is  more  significant  in  that 
the  author  is  of  German  descent,  studied  two  years  in  a 
German  university,  has  traveled  much  in  Germany,  and 
mainiained  an  intimate  friendship  with  a  large  number  of 
Qermau  literati  during  his  whole  life.     Up  to  1914  Dr. 
Super  was  an  "  ardent  pacifist "  and  coiild  not  believe  that 
the  spirit  that  reigned  in  Wilhelmstrasse  was  "  capable  of 
the  perfidy  that  it  soon  came  to  make  a  part  of  its  settled 
policy."    But  his  Tiews  rapidly  changed  as  he  watched 
"  the  gradual  deterioration  of  the  German  people,  and  the 
systematic  way  in  which  it  was  being  corrupted  by  pro- 
fessors and  clergy"  (p.  305).    The  volume  la  specially  val- 
uable as  dealing  not  with  vague  generalities  but  with  spe- 
cific facts.    It  also  gives  a  large  amount  of  valuable  bio- 
graphical information  concerning  the  leaders  of  German 
thought    The  book  deservTO  the  widest  attention. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


The  Bible  Champion 

Official  Organ  of  the  Bible  League  of  North  America 

FOBMBRLT  THE    AMERICAN    BIBLB    LBAGOB 

An  Orgaaixaikui  formed  to  promote  a  true  knowledge  ol  the  Bible 
•od  coiuequeiil  faith  io  il«  Divine  Authority 

In  its  New  Form  —  greatly  improved  and  enlarged  —  there  is  no 
magazine  published  to-day  that  gives  greater  value  for  the  investment 
made.  We  wish  to  prove  this  strong  claim  made  for  the  Bible  Cham- 
pion to  every  reader  of  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra. 

The  price  of  the  Biblk  CwAMnoN  iB  *1.!50  the  year;  Canada,  |1.65; 
Foreign,  |1.75;  Single  copy,  15c.  It  is  the  policy  of  the  Publishers  not 
to  send  free  sample  copies.  BUT  as  an  inducement  to  the  readers  of 
Bibliotheca  Sacra  to  examine  a  recent  number  of  Biblb  Champion  we 
will  promptly  mail  you  a  January  number  if  you  will  inclose  Five  One- 
cent  stamps  with  your  request.  This  offer  will  not  be  repeated!  Send 
for  yours  to-day! 

OB,  if  you  will  inclose  the  price  of  a  year's  subscription  we  will 
send  you  a  volume,  cloth,  of  Dr.  Esenwein's  "  Feathers  for  Shafts,"  free, 
prepMd,  as  a  Premium. 

OR,  send  us  the  price  of  a  year's  subscription,  and  add  50c  to  it, 
and  get  any  one  of  the  cloth-bound  books  below,  prepaid : — 

"Concessions  of  Liberalists  to  Orthodoxy"  {344  pp.,  |1.50),  by 
Dr.  Dorchester;  or,  "Christianity  and  Positivism"  {370  pp.,  ?1,75),  by 
President  McCosh;  or,  "Footprints  of  Sorrow"  (373  pp.,  fl,50),  by 
Dr.  Reid;  or,  "Voices  of  the  Soul  Answered  in  God"  {374  pp.,  tl.50), 
by  Dr.  Reid;  or,  "Christ  and  His  Religion"  (311  pp.,  $1.50),  by  Dr. 
Reid.  For  f2.00  we  will  send  you  any  one  of  above  volumes  and  the 
BffiLK  Champion  a  year,  prepaid.     (Canada,  $2.15;  Foreign,  $2.25.) 

JAY  BENSON  HAMILTON,  D.D.,  Editor.  191  South  2  Street, 
Brooklyn,  N.  Y. 

ASSOCIATE    EDITORS 

David  James  Burrell,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  William  H.  Bates,  D.D.,  Herbert  W. 

Magoun,  Ph.D.,  Luther  T.  Townsend,  D.D.,  LL.D., 

G.  Frederick  Wright,  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Address  aU  Orders,  and  mail  on  matters  of  Business,  to 
FRANK  J.  BOYER 
Managing  Bditor  and  Publisher,  Reading,  Pa. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE  WRITINGS  OP 
MR.  HAROLD  M.  WIENER, 

marking  aa  eiKich  ta  Fentateuclial 
CiitlclBm,  bave  nearly  aU  appeared 
In  the  BiBUOTHEOA  Saora  durlns 
tbe  laat  fifteen  years.  In  "  Esaaya  In 
Pentateuchal  Criticism  "  and  "  Penta- 
tenchal  Studies,"  most  of  tlie  articles 
before  1912  are  collected.  Since  tben, 
no  number  baa  been  wltbout  some 
contribution  from  bis  pen.  Hla  con- 
structive work  began  In  tbe  January 
number,  191S,  and  after  an  Interrup- 
tion because  of  the  war  1b  continued 
In  tbe  present  number.  Owing  to  the 
high  cost  of  printing  it  Is  not  expe- 
dient at  present  to  Issue  further  vol- 
umes collecting  these  essays,  but  lib- 
eral terms  for  back  ttumb««  of  tbe 
BtBuoTHEGA  SACK&  will  be  made  to 
the  large  numbw  of  Biblical  students 
tor  whom  these  writings  are  a  neces- 
sity If  they  would  keep  up  with  the 
times.    Correspondence  Is  solicited. 


joovGoot^lc 


Vol  lxxvi 


BIBLIOTHECA 

Eighty-Ninth  Year 


EDITOR 

G.  Frederick  wright 


JAUES  LINDSAY,  CHAKL£S  P.  THWING,  A.  A.  SEKLS,  WItXIAM  E.  BAKTOM 

HENKY  A.  snUSOH,  HERBERT  W.   UAGOUM,  AZARIAH  8.  ROOT 

HELVIN  G.  KYLE,  W.  H.  GRIFFITH  THOMAS 

GEORGE  E.   HALL 


The  Tionmous  Life  (I.) W.  H.  OriffltJt  Thonuu  267 

The  F*unDA>iENTAi.  DirrBBBnces  bbtwcut  Pkb-  Ami  Post-uiixsinabiafs 

David  A.  McOlenahan  389 

The  BfissioN  of  the  Chubch Newton  Wrav  312 

The  Reuoion  op  Moseb Harold  M.  Wieiter  323 

Cbitioai.  Notes — 

Tbe  Criticism  of  Uie  QiuU  Nsrratlve  (Judges  It.  26-41) 

H.  M.  Wiener  369 

Alter  the  Wai^What 36J 

Notices  or  Rbceri  Pubuoatiohb 362 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA  COMPANY 

OBERUN,  OHIO,  U.  S.  A. 

European  Agxkts,  Chaues  Hiohax  ft  Son 
STa  Farringdoa  Street.  London,  B.  C. 


SIMOLK   NUMBRR,  TV  CBNT« 


YEARLY   SUBKRIPTION,  «SjM 


Bntared  ftt  the  Post  Ofllce  In  (Mwrlln,  Oblo,  u 


Seennd-eUai  Uattcr 

D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Unusual  Blessing 

Attended  the  Conference  on  "  World  ETangelism  and  Vital  Christianity 
After  the  War"  held  at  The  Moody  Bible  Inetitnte  of  Chicago,  Fel>- 
ruary  3-7.  From  Monday  night,  when  Dr.  James  M.  Gray  gave  the 
address  of  welcome,  sounding  the  keynote  of  the  Conference,  which  was 
to  be  the  importance  of  "  proclaiming  the  Oospel  that  we  have  always 
proclaimed,  and  holding  up  the  standard  of  the  Cross,"  until  the  last 
address  by  Dr.  Howard  Agnew  Johnston  on  "  The  Atmosphere  of  Spirit- 
ual Power,"  every  speaher  rallied  whole-heartedly  to  a  constructiye 
program  of  evangelism  and  united  testimony  to  the  fundamentals  of 
the  faith. 

Men  from  many  denominations,  leaders  in  their  circles,  spoke  of 
nearly  every  phase  of  work  which  now  lies  before  us  in  preaching 
Christ  and  Him  Crucified  to  a  lost  and  jxrishing  world.  Among  the 
speakers  were  the  following :  Rev,  Joseph  Kyle,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  President 
Xenia  Theological  Seminary;  Ecv.  J.  C.  Massee,  D.D.,  First  Baptist 
Church,  Dayton,  Ohio;  Evangelist  Henry  Ostrora,  Methodist;  Bev.  Sam- 
uel M.  Zwemer,  D.D.,  Missionary,  Cairo,  Egypt ;  Kev.  E.  M.  Potest,  D.D., 
ex-President  Furman  Baptist  College;  Rev.  D.  S.  Kennedy,  D.D.,  Ed- 
itor The  Presbyterian,  Philadelphia;  Itev,  John  McNicol,  B.D.,  Toronto 
Bible  College;  Rev.  E.  A.  Wollam,  Cleveland  Bible  Institute;  Rev.  W. 
Bllia,  Vancouver  Bible  Institute;  Rev.  Wm,  B.  Riley,  Northwestern 
Bible  School,  Minneapolis;  Rev.  Wm.  L.  Pettingill,  Dean  Philadelphia 
School  of  the  Bible;  Rev.  John  A.  Davis,  Evangelist;  Bishop  Joseph  F. 
Berry,  Methodist,  Philadelphia;  also  Jewish  Mission  and  Rescue  Mis- 
sion representatives. 

By  special  arrangement  THE  CHBISTIAN  WORKERS  MAGA- 
ZINE will  publish  a  full  report  of  the  important  addresses  in  the  March 
and  April  numbers.  No  extra  charge  will  be  made  for  thi»,  as  it  will  be 
sold  at  the  regular  price  of  a  single  eopy  of  the  magazine  —  only  15 
cents,  or  the  two  for  25  cents  —  but  or<iei-  at  once  if  you  desire  a  copy. 

In  the  April  number  to  follow  will  be  published  a  special  article 
by  Pastor  D.  M.  Panton,  of  Norwich,  England,  on  "  The  Present  Rise 
and  Ultimate  End  of  Democracy." 

THE  CHRISTIAN  WORKERS  MAGAZINE  is  published  monthly 
at  $1.50  a  year.    Address 

THE  CHRISTIAN  WORKERS  MAGAZINE 

144  Institute  Place,  CHICAGO,  ILL. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA 


THE  VICTORIOUS  LIFE    (I.) 

TEE    BEVEBHND    W.    H,    OBIFFITH    THOUAS^   D.D. 
WTCLIFFE   COLLEOEj  TORONTO 

Etubtthino  that  comes  from  Dr.  Warfieid  deserves  the 
closest  attentioQ;  and  as  one  of  his  very  many  debtors, 
who  has  learnt  to  value  what  he  writes,  even  though  it 
may  not  always  be  possible  to  accept  his  conclusions,  I 
have  naturally  read  with  care  his  articles  in  the  Princeton 
Theological  Review  and  in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  on  The 
Victorious  Life,  especially  because  of  my  connection  with 
the  Keswick  Movement  and  the  corresponding  Movement 
in  America,  and  also  because  of  Dr.  Warfleld's  criticism 
of  my  own  position.  I  hope  I  am  ready  to  listen  carefolVf 
to  all  criticism  and  also  to  correct  anything  wrong.  Bet 
I  now  desire  to  present  certain  considerations  suggested 
by  his  articles,  in  order  to  show  that  those  who  favor  in 
general  what  is  known  as  the  Keswick  Movement  are  not 
altogether  without  reasons  which  they  regard  as  adequate. 
It  must  also  be  added  that  they  do  not  believe  Dr.  War- 
fleld's  interpretation  of  their  position  is  always  and  neces- 
sarily the  true  one. 

I 

It  will  be  convenient  first  to  comment  on  certain  points 
raised  in  Dr.  Warfleid's  articles.  No  attempt  will  be  made 
to  deal  with  every  contention,  but  only  an  effort  to  con- 
sider the  more  outstanding  of  his  criticisms.  For  con- 
venience I  call  attention  to  the  pages  of  his  articles  and, 
as  far  as  possible,  quote  what  he  said.  The  references  are 
all  to  the  Princeton  Theological  Beviett}. 

P.  321,  Jnly,  1918.    The  opening  sentences  seem  to  im- 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  808.    1 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


268  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

ply  that  those  who  favor  vhat  is  known  as  "  The  Victo- 
rious Life  "  "  ask  to  be  themselves  made  glori&ed  saints  in 
the  twinkling  of  an  eye."  I  have  never  heard  anything  of 
the  kind  set  forth ;  and,  indeed,  the  whole  argument  of  the 
opening  page  of  Dr.  Warfleld's  first  article,  which  sug- 
gests that  men  are  impatient  with  God's  slow  processes 
and  "  demand  immediate  tangible  results,"  is  not  tme  of 
those  who  are  the  subjects  of  his  criticism.  It  is  said  that 
SDch  people  "themselves  cut  the  knot  and  boldly  declare 
complete  salvation  to  be  within  their  reach  at  their  option, 
OP  already  grasped  and  enjoyed."  1  would  submit  that 
Dr.  War&eld  is  all  unconsciously  conveying  a  wrong  im- 
pression, for,  so  far  as  I  know,  nothing  like  this  is  held 
by  those  against  whom  he  writes.  Everything,  of  course, 
depends  upon  the  meaning  of  the  term  "  complete  salva- 
tion." All  the  books  I  have  been  able  to  consult  on  this 
subject  maintain  that  salvation  is  threefold  (including, 
first,  deliverance  from  the  penalty,  then,  from  the  power, 
and,  last  of  all,  from  the  presence  of  sin),  and  that  sal- 
vation cannot  possibly  be  "  complete "  until  the  third 
stage  has  been  reached,  which  will  never  be  experienced 
in  this  life.  I  would,  therefore,  urge  respectfully,  and  yet 
strongly,  that  it  is  not  fair  to  charge  opponents  with  "  ad- 
justing the  nature  of  complete  salvation  to  fit  their  pres- 
ent attainments." 

P.  322.  More  than  once  Dr.  Warfield  maintains  that  the 
modem  view  of  what  he  calls  "  entire,  instantaneous  sanc- 
tification  "  is  due  to  John  Wesley,  and  in  more  than  one 
place  Holiness  teaching  is  described  as  "  Wesleyan  doc- 
trine." But  I  do  not  think  Dr.  Warfield  is  either  accurate 
or  fair  in  attributing  all  "  Holiness  "  teaching  to  the  Wes- 
leyan view.  While  many  are  deeply  grateful  for  the  em- 
phasis laid  on  Holiness  by  John  Wesley,  John  Fletcher, 
and  their  friends,  it  la  well  known  that  the  Keswick  Move- 
ment is  absolutely  separate  from  the  Wesleyan  Movement, 
and  claims  the  right  and  takes  the  opportunity  to  state 
the  truth  of  Holiness  in  a  distinctly  different  way. 

P.  323.     Several  times  in  his  artidea  Dr.  Warfield  has 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorious  Life  269 

called  attention  to  what  he  believes  to  be  an  essential  ele- 
ment of  Holiness  teaching,  in  the  separation  of  juatiflca- 
tioQ  and  sanctification,  which  are  said  to  be  "  divided  from 
one  another  as  two  separate  gifts  of  God."  Now  while  it 
may  be  possible  for  Dr.  Warfield  to  quote  writers  to  this 
effect,  I  wonld  like  to  point  out  that  it  is  no  essential  part 
of  the  Holiness  position.  On  the  contrary,  I  have  heard 
speakers  at  Keswick  and  elsewhere  insist  in  the  strongest 
way  that  justification  and  sanctification  are  to  be  regarded 
as  essentially  one  gift,  the  faith  which  accepts  justification 
as  an  act  issuing  in  an  attitude  of  faith  lor  sanctification. 
Again  and  again  it  has  been  urged  that  in  the  normal 
Christian  life  the  soul  receives  at  the  outset  a  complete 
justification,  together  with  a  commencing  sanctification, 
and  both  of  these  in  Christ  (1  Cor.  i.  30).  But  while  this 
is  BO,  may  it  not  be  said  that  a  man  can  enter  upon  the 
position  of  justification  without  fully  realizing  what  is 
involved  in  sanctification?  Let  me  quote  from  a  book  by 
a  Keswick  leader  which,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  Dr.  Warfield 
has  not  noticed,  though  it  contains  some  of  the  soberest 
tuid  clearest  teaching.  I  refer  to  "  The  Law  of  Liberty  in 
the  Spiritual  Life  "  by  the  Rev.  Evan  H.  Hopkins,  one  of 
the  earliest  members,  indeed  one  of  the  founders,  of  Kes- 
wick. Mr.  Hopkins  is  calling  attention  to  the  exhortation 
in  Kom.  vi.  14  to  "yield  yonr  members  instruments  of 
righteousness,"  and  then  adds: — 

"  If  the  Apostle  had  felt  sure  that  these  Christians  at 
Some  had,  immediately  on  their  conversion,  thus  surren- 
dered themselves  to  God,  would  he  have  deemed  it  neces- 
sary now  to  press  upon  them  so  earnestly  this  definite  act 
of  consecration?  The  truth  is,  the  Apostle  does  not  as- 
sume or  take  for  granted  that  all  those  Christian  converts 
were  really  walking  in  a  condition  of  practical  consecra- 
tion to  God"  (p.  108). 

Does  not  this  aspect  represent  a  truth  which  is  experienced 
from  time  to  time  among  Christian  people? 

P.  323.  At  this  point  it  may  be  worth  while  to  surest 
the  necessity  and  importance  of  a  strict  definition  of  terms. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


270  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July. 

What  is  to  be  understood  by  Sanctiflcation  ?  The  New 
Testament  teaches  a  twofold  aspect  of  it,  —  the  one  re- 
ferring to  our  judicial  position,  and  the  other  to  our  spir- 
itual condition.  In  Hebrews  the  term  "  sanctified  "  is  de- 
scriptive of  the  whole  company  of  believers  and  is  almost 
equivalent  to  Justification  in  Romans.  It  seems  important 
to  recognize  this  primary  idea  of  Sanctification  as  mean- 
ing "  s^mration,"  for  it  shows  that  in  this  respect  there 
is  no  difference  between  one  Christian  and  another,  the 
youngest  being  as  truly  sanctified  as  the  oldest  (Heb.  x. 
10,  14).  A  careful  study  of  Hebrews  indicates  that  the 
terms  "  sanctified  "  and  "  perfected  "  describe  the  present 
judicial  position  of  every  believer  by  reason  of  the  sacri- 
ficial work  of  the  Lord  Jeeus.  Then,  arising  out  of  this, 
comes  the  more  familiar  thought  of  Sanctification  as  a 
process,  the  judicial  position  being  realized  in  experience. 
And  80,  while  Justification  may  be  considered  to  refer  to 
a  position  which  leads  to  a  condition,  Sanctification  in- 
cludes both  position  and  condition.  Justification  and 
Sanctification  are,  therefore,  complete  from  Ghid's  stand- 
point; but  while  Justification  needs  immediate  and  com- 
plete acceptance,  Sanctification  calls  also  for  thorough 
recognition,  followed  by  constant  realization. 

P.  327.  In  the  note  on  this  page  Dr.  Warfield  maintains 
that  Scripture  never  connects  Sanctification  directly  with 
Faith,  not  even  in  Acts  xxvi.  18.  But  it  may  be  fairly 
asked.  Why  may  not  Faith  in  this  passage  iudnde  and 
cover  the  entire  process  of  salvation?  It  does  not  seem 
possible,  nor  evoi  easy,  to  exclude  "  sanctified "  from  it, 
especially  as  faith  is  a  principle  of  continuance  as  well  as 
commencement  (Qal.  11.  20).  The  entire  thought  of  faith 
in  the  great  chapter,  Hebrews  xi.,  finds  its  emphasis  on  liv- 
ing, so  that  the  Christian  life  from  first  to  last  is  "  a  life 
of  faith."  For  these  reasons  I  would  contend  that  Dr. 
Bartlet  in  Hastings's  Dictionary  of  the  Bible,  as  quoted 
by  Dr.  Warfield,  is  absolutely  correct. 

P.  328.  Dr.  Warfield  says  that  "  the  whole  sixth  chap- 
ter of  Bomans  was  written  for  no  other  purpose  than  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorima  Life  271 

assert  and  demonatrate  that  JustlflcatioD  and  Sanctiflca- 
Hon  are  indissolubly  bound  together;  that  we  cannot  have 
the  one  without  baring  the  other."  While  this  is,  of  coarse, 
true  from  the  standpoint  of  Qod's  purpose  for  the  b^ever, 
it  may  be  qoestioned  whether  Sanctiflcation,  in  the  sense 
of  consecration,  followed  by  pariflcation,  is  always  at  once 
realized  in  peraonal  experience.  There  is  no  desire  at  all 
to  "  wrest  these  two  things  apart  and  ma^e  separate  gifts 
of  grace  of  them."  All  that  ia  intended  is  that  there  should 
tie  the  strongest  possible  emphasis  on  the  need  of  oar 
experience  agreeing  with  out  acceptance.  Once  again, 
therefore,  I  desire  to  say  that  the  charge  of  separating 
Justification  and  Sanctification  is  no  essential  part  of  the 
position  criticized  by  Dr.  Warfield.  For  this  reason  I 
would  also  maintain  that  it  is  not  correct  to  speak  of  sep- 
arating these  two  aspects  of  faith  and  life  and  "  describ- 
ing them  as  unrelated  operations"  (p.  591).  I  may  add 
that  I  entirely  agree,  and  so  would  all  who  take  the  same 
general  view  as  I  do,  with  the  quotation  made  by  Dr.  War- 
field  from  Professor  Livingston  {p.  329). 

P.  329.  It  is  difflcult  for  me  to  understand  the  criti- 
cism made  by  Dr.  Warfleld  of  the  Greek  word  katargeo  in 
Bom.  ri.  6 :  "  that  the  body  of  sin  might  be  done  away." 
He  says :  "  The  attempted  weakening  of  the  phrase  '  that 
the  body  of  sin  might  be  done  away '  by  resurrecting  the 
etymological  sense  of  the  Oreek  word  . .  .  is  . .  .  bad."  I  hare 
always  had  the  impression  that  there  is  a  clear  distinc- 
tion here,  and  elsewhere,  between  katargeo  and  apollumi, 
the  former  being  understood  to  mean  to  "  render  inopera- 
tive "  or  "  inert,"  as  distinct  from  "  annihilate."  At  any 
rate,  it  is  used  of  onr  Lord's  dealing  with  Satan  in  Heb. 
ii.  14,  where  it  cannot  mean  "  annihilation."  And  Dr.  War- 
field  allows  support  for  this  view  from  Banday  and  Head- 
lam  on  Romans. 

P.  329.  With  regard  to  the  word  rendered  "  condemna- 
tion "  in  Rom.  vlii.  1,  whether  Deissmann  is  right  or  wrong 
does  not  really  matter;  the  main  point  is  whether  the  idea 
of  "  condemnation  "  is  to  be  limited  to  the  judicial  aspect, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


272  Bibtiotheca  Sacra  [July, 

or  whether  it  ma;  not  include  experimental  condemoatiou 
OB  well.  Dr.  Warfleld  evidently  favors  the  former,  but  I 
do  not  think  he  need  dismiss  as  imposBible  the  other  view, 
especially  as  it  has  the  support  of  a  well-known  commen- 
tator like  Lange,  who  remarks : — 

"  The  question  of  the  reference  to  justification  or  sanc- 
tiflcation  must  affect  the  interpretation  of  condemnation, 
since  yerse  2,  b^inning  with  gar,  seems  to  introduce  a 
proof.  The  position  of  the  chapter  in  the  epistle,  as  well 
aa  a  fair  exegesis  of  the  verses,  sustain  the  reference  to 
eanctification.  (Not  to  the  raitire  exclusion  of  the  other, 
any  more  than  they  are  sundered  in  Christian  experience.) 
We  must  then  take  no  condemnation  in  a  wide  sense." 

On  this  view  it  would  be  perfectly  legitimate  to  include 
in  it  the  thou^t  of  "  disability "  to  which  Dr.  Warfleld 
takes  such  exception.  Then,  too,  I  fancy  there  must  be 
something  of  emphasis  in  the  first  word  of  Rom.  iii.  1, 
ouden.  Oodet  renders  and  expounds  it  in  such  a  way  as 
to  imply  "no  sort  of  condemnation";  and  for  this  reason 
some  of  us  feel,  following  Lange  (and  Godet  himself),  that 
it  can  (and  ought  to)  have  a  wider  view  than  that  of  ju- 
dicial condemnation. 

P.  335.  Dr.  Warfield  considers  that  "  the  most  fatal  de- 
fect "  in  this  Holiness  Movement  is  "  the  neglect  to  pro- 
vide any  deliverance  for  the  corruption  of  man's  heart." 
I  confess  that  this  is  surprising  to  me,  for  I  have  always 
thought  that  what  is  sometimes  called  "  inborn  corrup- 
tion "  was  specifically  dealt  with  by  Holiness  teachers. 
What  they  say  about  it  is  that,  according  to  St.  Paul,  this 
corruption  of  man's  heart  is  hostile  to  God  and  is  neither 
subject  to  God's  law  nor  can  be  (Rom.  viii.  7).  For  this  rea- 
son the  teaching  is  given  that  the  Christian  is  to  reckon 
himself  dead  to  it  (Rom.  vi.  11),  although,  of  course,  it 
is  not  dead  in  itself,  nor  wDl  be  until  the  believer  ia  de- 
livered hereafter  from  the  presence  of  sin.  Mr.  Hopkins, 
in  the  book  to  which  I  have  already  referred,  has  the  sub- 
ject of  Sin  as  his  first  chapter  and  points  out  various  as- 
pects of  it,  including  sin  as  an  offense  against  God,  as  a 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorious  Life  273 

niluig  principle,  as  a  moral  defllement,  as  a  spiritual  dis- 
ease, as  an  acquired  Iiabit,  and  as  an  indwelling  tendency, 
on  all  of  which  he  provides,  in  my  judgment,  clear,  strong, 
balanced,  and  Biblical  teaching. 

P.  337.  Dr.  Warfleld  remarks  that  those  who  favor  the 
Holiness  Movement  '*  teach  a  purely  external  salvation.  All 
that  they  provide  for  is  the  deliverance  from  the  external 
p^alties  of  ein  and  from  the  necessity  of  actual  sinning." 
T  cannot  think  this  is  either  true  or  fair,  because  salvation 
is  decidedly  internal  and  involves  much  more  than  "  ex- 
ternal penalties."  It  is  certainly  true  that  there  is  no 
present  or  immediate  "  deliverance  from  cormption,"  and 
it  is  also  accurate  to  say.  that  "  the  heart  remains  corrupt" 
I  should  have  thought  that  this  was  the  truth  of  the  New 
Testament  as  well  as  that  of  personal  experience.  At  any 
rale,  some  of  us  have  not  yet  observed  any  essential  dif- 
ference between  the  youngest  and  the  oldest  Christian  in 
regard  to  remaining  corruption,  which,  but  for  the  pres- 
ence and  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  is  as  likely  to  start  up 
in  the  mature  saint  as  in  the  immature  believer.  Dr.  War- 
fleld thinks  that  "  to  keep  a  sinner  remaining  a  sinner  free 
from  actually  sinning"  would  be  but  a  poor  salvation 
(p.  340).  But  it  may  be  asked  whether,  in  spite  of  the  crit- 
icism, this  is,  after  all,  not  "  the  way  the  Holy  Spirit  oper- 
ates in  saving  the  soul."  As  I  have  already  said,  I  do  not 
think  it  is  either  Scriptural  or  true  to  experience  to  say 
that  "  He  cures  us  precisely  by  curing  our  sinful  nature." 
The  common  idea  known  as  "  a  change  of  heart "  does  not 
seem  to  me  to  stand  the  test  of  Scripture  in  the  light  of 
such  passages  as  John  iii,  6;  Rom.  viii.  7.  Then,  too.  Dr. 
Warfleld  says  that  "  to  imagine  we  can  be  saved  from  the 
power  of  sin  without  the  eradication  of  the  corruption  in 
which  the  power  of  sin  has  its  seed  is  to  imagine  that  an 
evil  tree  can  be  compelled  to  bring  forth  good  fruit "  {p. 
341).  Here  again  I  fail  to  see  the  support  from  Scripture 
for  such  an  idea  of  "  eradication,"  which  is  almost  tanta- 
mount to  the  very  "Methodist  doctrine"  which  Dr.  War- 
fleld so  strenuously  opposes.    And  so  1  can  only  repeat 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


274  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [^^J, 

my  contention,  which  Dr.  Warfleld  quotes,  that  in  the 
present  life  we  have  deliverance  from  the  guilt,  penalty, 
and  bondage  of  sin,  and  "  deliverance  hereafter  from  the 
very  presence  of  sin"  (p.  341).  This,  I  maintain,  is  the 
only  "  eradicatioB "  which  can  be  foand  in  Scripture. 

P.  340.  It  is  a  great  puzzle  to  me  to  read  these  words 
of  Dr.  Warfleld's :  "  He  cures  our  sinning  precisely  by 
curing  our  sinfnl  nature  ...  it  is,  in  other  words,  pre- 
cisely by  eradicating  our  sinfulneaa  that  He  deUvers  qb 
from  sinning."  1  cannot  see  how  this  Is  to  be  reconciled 
with  the  plain  statement  of  the  Apostle  already  quoted: 
"  The  minding  of  the  flesh  is  enmity  against  Qod,  for  it  is 
not  subject  to  the  law  of  God,  neither,  indeed,  can  be." 
Are  we  to  understand  that  the  sinful  nature  actually  be- 
comes good,  and  that  in  process  of  time  God  "  cures  our 
sinning  by  curing  our  sinful  nature"?  I  have  always 
thought  that  our  nature  in  itself  is  just  as  sinful  now  and 
to  the  end  of  life  as  it  was  when  we  were  converted,  and 
that  there  is  no  eradication  of  it,  or  even  improvement  of 
it  possible;  because,  if  only  circumstances  are  favorable, 
it  is  as  likely  to  burst  forth  at  the  end  of  a  long  life  of 
Gbrlstian  service  as  at  the  beginning. 

P.  342.  Dr.  Warfleld  is  strongly  opposed  to  my  sug- 
gestion that  the  tme  view  of  the  relation  of  the  believer 
to  his  sinful  nature  is  neither  suppression  nor  eradication, 
but  counteraction;  and  although  1  have  given  very  careful 
attention  to  his  argument,  I  am  afraid  I  still  maintain  the 
position  that  counteraction  is  the  best  way  of  expressing 
the  truth.  What  I  meant,  and  still  mean,  la  that  the  coun- 
teraction of  the  Holy  Spirit  is  intended  to  be  a  more 
powerful  force  than  the  downward  tendoicy  of  sin.  And 
I  maintain  that  in  proportion  as  we  allow  the  Holy  Spirit 
to  rule  in  our  life  He  does  counteract  the  evil  principle 
that  remains  in  us.  This  thought  of  counteraction  is  no 
novel  idea  of  mine,  but  is  found  in  several  of  the  Keswick 
statements;  and  1  believe  it  represents  the  truth  of  those 
who  consider  that  the  thought  of  suppression  does  not  go 
far  enough,  while  the  idea  of  eradication   (immediate  or 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorioua  Life  275 

gradual)  contradicts  both  Scripture  and  experience.  Cer- 
tainly Mr.  Hopkins  more  than  once  calls  attention  to  tbis 
tmth  as  that  which  expresses  what  Scriptnre  teaches  in 
regard  to  the  relation  of  the  believer  to  his  old  nature.  To 
use  one  of  his  illostratioDS :  "  When  a  light  is  introdaced 
into  a  dark  cliaml»er  the  darkness  instantl;  disappears, 
but  the  tendency  to  darkness  remains;  and  the  room  can 
on^  be  maintained  in  a  condition  of  illumination  by  the 
continnal  counteraction  of  that  tendency"  (p.  29).  And 
so  I  would  say  without  hesitation  that,  U  the  Holy  Spirit 
is  permitted  to  "  operate  invariably  in  every  action  of  the 
Christiao/'  it  would  be,  without  doubt,  impossible  for  the 
principle  of  sin  to  gain  a  victory.  Dr.  Warfleld  main- 
tains that  on  this  theory  of  counteraction  I  should  teach 
"not  that  Christians  need  not  sin,  bnt  that  they  cannot 
sin"  (p.  343).  But  what  I  maintain  is  that,  snpported  by 
the  illustration  nsed  by  Ur.  Hopkins,  Christians  need  not 
sin,  and  if  they  allow  the  Holy  Spirit  to  "  operate  invari- 
ably "  they  will  not  sin. 

P.  344.  I  am  afraid  that  I  cannot  accept  the  view  that 
the  Holy  Spirit  is  cleansing  the  foundation  in  the  sense 
that  He  is  attacking  "  directly  the  heart  out  of  which  the 
issues  of  life  flow."  All  through  this  statement  Dr.  War- 
field  seems  to  me  to  imply  a  gradual  extirpation  of  the  evil 
nature;  and,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  this  is  disproved  both  by 
Scripture  and  by  experience  of  everyday  life. 

P.  344.  Dr.  Warfleld  maintains  that  this  difterence  of 
standpoint  between  him  and  me  is  doe  to  my  mieconc^- 
tion  of  the  seventh  of  Romans,  which  he  says  "  depicts  for 
us  the  process  of  the  eradication  of  the  old  nature."  I  am 
afraid  I  cannot  see  this  in  that  chapter.  Here  again  I 
quote  from  Mr.  Hopkins: — 

"  It  is  worthy  of  note  that  whilst  the  Apostle  in  those 
eleven  verses  (Bom.  vii.  14-24)  refers  to  himself,  either 
directly  or  indirectly,  some  thirty  times,  he  does  not  there 
make  a  single  reference  either  to  Christ  or  the  Holy  Spirit. 
In  reading  that  passage  it  is  not  necessary  to  suppose  that 
the  Apostle  is  speaking  from  the  standpoint  of  a  present 
experience,  but  from  the  standpoint  of  a  present  conric- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


276  Bibliotheoa  Sacra  [July, 

tjon,  as  to  the  tendencies  of  the  two  natares  that  were 
then  and  there  present  within  him"  (p.  49). 

For  m;  part  I  bare  long  ceased  to  be  concerned  as  to 
whether  this  chapter  refers  to  a  believer  or  an  unconverted 
man ;  and  the  fact  that  there  is  much  to  t>e  said  for  both 
sides  seems  a  reason  for  avoiding  the  question  altogether. 
On  the  one  hand,  it  certainly  is  diflScuIt  to  think  of  the 
unconverted  expressing  his  delight  in  God's  law  (ver.  22) ; 
bat,  on  the  other  hand,  it  is  equally  difBcnlt  to  think  of 
a  believer  saying  that  he  is  "carnal,  Bold  under  sin"  (ver. 
14).  For  tliis  reason  I  favor  the  view  that  this  chapter 
is  concerned  with  the  man,  whatever  hia  exact  apiritoal 
position,  who  is  trying  to  be  holy  by  his  own  effort,  juBt 
as  in  chapter  iii.  the  man  is  trying  to  be  justified  by  hia 
own  effort.  And  the  fact  that  in  this  chapter,  as  Ur.  Hop- 
kins points  out,  there  is  no  reference  to  the  Holy  Spirit, 
as  there  is  in  chapter  viii.,  convinces  me  of  the  tmth  of 
wliat  Dr.  Warfleld  quotes  from  my  book  that  "  there  is 
no  Divine  grace  in  that  chapter;  only  man's  nature  strug- 
■  gling  to  be  good  and  holy  by  law."    It  is  a  surprise  to  me 

■  that  Dr.  Warfleld  can  see  in  it  "  Divine  grace  warring 
against  the  natural  evU  of  sin  "  (p.  345) ;  for,  if  this  were 
the  case,  I  do  not  see  what  need  there  would  be  to  go  on 
to  chapter  viii,,  wliich,  according  to  my  view,  gives  the  nor- 
mal life  of  the  Christian  as  possessed  by  Divine  grace  and 
dominated  by  the  Holy  Spirit.  Dr.  W.  P.  Mackay,  a  Pres- 
byterian clergyman,  the  author  of  that  fine  book,  "  Grace 
and  Truth,"  puts  the  matter  thus: — 

"How  does  the  Christian  grow  in  grace?  Does  his 
old  heart  get  better?  The  Spirit  of  God  in  John  teaches 
that  in  a  converted  man  there  is  a  new  fountain.  Many 
Christians  seem  to  think  that  all  we  get  at  conversion  is 
a  divinely  given  filter  to  the  old  fountain,  which  will  grad- 

■  ually  increase  in  its  power  until  it  renders  the  filthy  waters 
of  the  old  fountain  clean.  In  Gal,  v.  15-26  the  whole  point 
is  stated.  Two  fountaina  are  spoken  of  in  the  converted 
man,  sending  out  their  natural  streams.  The  streams  from 
the  old  fountain,  the  flesh,  are  given  in  the  19th  verse.  Are 
we  anywhere  taught  in  Scripture  that  this  evil  nature  is 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victoriom  Life  277 

refined,  is  purified?  Certainly,  indeed,  the  man,  the  indi- 
ridual,  is  purified,  is  cleansed,  made  more  holy,  is  morallj 
sanctified ;  but  it  is  in  altogether  another  way  than  by  try- 
ing to  cure  what  is  '  incurably  wicked.'  The  streams  from 
the  new  fountain  —  the  Spirit  —  are  giveu  in  the  22nd 
verse;  and  we  are  told  that  the  Christian's  holy  life  is 
walking  in  the  Spirit,  mortifying  the  '  members  which  are 
apou  the  earth'  (Col.  iii.  5),  keeping  them  in  their  place 
of  death,  '  not  fulfilling  the  lusts  of  the  fiesb.' " 

P.  346.  Dr.  Warfield  is  very  severe  on  the  doctrine  of 
the  two  natures  which  be  associates  both  with  "  the  Breth- 
ren "  and  with  the  Holiness  Movement.  And  yet,  in  my 
judgment,  the  question  is  not  settled  by  Dr.  Warfield's 
criticisms,  because  there  is  much  in  Scripture  that  seems 
to  indicate  the  presence  of  two  elements,  whether  or  not 
we  call  them  "  natures,"  in  the  believer.  When  the  Apostle 
says,  "  If  any  man  is  in  Christ  he  is  a  new  creature  "  (2  Cor. 
r.  17) ,  I  do  not  think  this  means  the  entire  removal  of  the 
old  nature  from  the  moment  of  conversion.  Nor  do  I  be- 
lieve that  putting  away  the  old  man  and  putting  on  the 
new  (Eph.  iv.  22-24)  can  refer  to  anything  else  than  a 
twofold  attitude  which  concerns  the  entire  Christian  life. 
At  any  rate,  the  view  is  not  to  be  limited  to  the  Holiness 
Movement,  as  Dr.  Warfield  himself  admits,  and  there  are 
also  thoroughly  good  Presbyterians  who  take  the  same 
line;  so  that  if  the  Holiness  people  err  they  err  in  good 
company,  and  they  certainly  find  themselves  supported  by 
a  numijer  of  passages  which,  on  Dr.  Warfield's  view,  are 
inexplicable  (1  Cor.  Hi.  3;  Gal.  iii.  3;  vi.  8;  Kom.  viii.  4^-7). 

P.  347.  Dr.  Warfield  contends  that  the  teaching  against 
which  he  writes  involves  the  thought  that  the  Holy  Spirit 
"  is  only  at  our  disposal  and  everything  is,  after  all,  in  our 
own  control."  And  he  evidently  objects  to  the  statement 
that  a  Christian  possessed  with  the  indwelling  Spirit  of  God 
may  choose  to  walk  after  the  fiesh.  I  should  have  thought 
this  latter  idea  was  too  obvious  for  denial,  not  only  in  the 
light  of  such  a  passage  as  Rom.  viii.  4-9,  but  also  as  illus- 
trated by,  moat  unfortunately,  very  many  a  Christian  ex- 
perience.    Even  on  Dr.  Warfield's  own  showing  this  may 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


278  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July. 

be  true,  (or,  according  to  him,  a  ChriBtiaiL  can  describe 
himself  as  "carnal,  sold  under  sin"  (Bom.  vii.  14).  But 
it  is  not  accurate  to  charge  the  Holiness  Movement  with 
teaching  that  the  Holy  Spirit  is  "  in  our  own  controL" 
This  gives  an  entirely  wrong  impression  and  tends  to  ig- 
nore the  tmth  that  the  Hoi;  Spirit  works  in  and  throng 
OS,  according  to  our  faith  and  faithfulness. 

P.  352.  Dr.  Warfield  criticizes  Mr.  TrumbuU  for  what 
he  calls  "quietism"  and  he  also  speaks  of  "Quietistic 
Perfectionism"  (p.  353).  In  reply  to  this  I  should  like 
to  quote  some  words  of  the  Bishop  of  Durham,  Dr.  Moule, 
spoken  at  the  last  Convention  at  Keswick: — 

"  Bo  the  power  of  peace  is  a  mighty  thing  in  the  Chris- 
tian life,  and  for  forty-four  years  '  Keswick '  has  consist- 
ently and  with  ever-renewed  emphasis  dwelt  upon  that 
side  of  the  Christian  life.  '  We  who  have  believed  do  enteir 
into  rest,'  that  rest  at  the  centre  which  is  the  very  best  pos- 
sible thing  for  action  at  the  circumference.  When  a  great 
wheel  is  well  geared  at  the  centre  it  can  run  its  swiftest 
round. 

"  But,  when  I  have  said  this,  I  come  back  to  my  text  and 
aak,  What  has  labour  to  do  with  this  regtf  What  has  tak- 
ing pains  to  do  with  this  peace?  We  sang  a  beautiful  hymn 
at  the  opening  of  the  meeting.  Like  many  a  great  spiritual 
utterance,  it,  wisely  and  rightly,  as  oar  Lord  and  Master 
Himself  often  did,  lays  the  whole  stress  upon  one  truth, 
one  side  of  truth,  leaving  the  thoughtful  believer  to  rec- 
ollect connections.  That  hymn  seemed  almost  to  prompt 
the  question,  '  What  is  there  left  for  me  to  do  bat  just  to 
trust  in  Christ?'  If  the  truth  of  that  hymn  is  taken  as 
the  whole  truth,  it  is  transparent  that  one  of  those  critics 
of  '  Keswick,'  of  whom  Mr.  Fullerton  so  helpfully  re- 
minded us  last  night,  might  raise  a  valid  objection  to  it. 
Perhaps  there  are  some  such  friendly  critics  in  this  assem- 
bly,  as  many  a  one  has  been  who  has  ended  with  thanking 
God  for  'Keswick.'  (So  George  Macgregor  did.  He  came 
to  judge  us,  be  came  to  see  what  those  good  people  could 
say  that  a  well-trained  young  Scottish  theologian  did  not 
know  much  better  before.  And  he  went  away  with  a  vision 
of  God  which  made  his  life  the  wonderful  thing  it  was  to 
the  last  hoar.)  But  critics  of  'Keswick'  might  easUy  say, 
if  we  struck  that  note  only,  and  touched  only  that  string: 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorious  Life  279 

'  What  ia  there  more  for  yon  to  do?  la  this  life  really  bo 
^ortlefiB,  so  careless?  Is  it  a  life  in  which  you  simply  get 
into  a  stream  and  swim  with  it,  and  let  it  take  you  on  for 
ever?  Is  that  aU7'  No,  that  is  much,  bat  it  ia  not  all. 
Hallowing  and  keeping  grace  is  indeed  a  stream,  and  the 
stream  is  strong,  and  to  be  in  it  ia  blessed.  Nevertheless, 
there  is  a  large  place  in  the  true  life  for  labour  and  for 
pains.  How  does  this  come  in?  Surely  with  the  recollec- 
tion that  we  can  use  the  trusted  Chriat  only  when  we  are 
keeping  aicake.  And  you  do  not  keep  awake  by  growing 
slack  in  your  habits,  in  your  devotions,  in  your  thinking, 
iu  your  self-examining,  in  your  serving  and  loving;  you  do 
not  keep  awake  by  indolence  in  any  of  these  matters.  To 
take  God's  means  that  we  may  keep  awake  needs  pains." 

On  pages  862  and  863,  as  weU  as  elsewhere,  Dr.  War- 
field  reflects  seriously  on  what  he  calls  "  the  dogma  of  the 
inalienable  ability  of  the  human  will  to  do  at  any  time 
and  under  any  cireumstancea  precisely  what  in  its  un- 
motived  caprice  it  chancea  to  turn  to."  I  do  not  believe 
thia  is  a  fair  statement  of  the  Holiness  doctrine  of  free 
will.  But  quite  apart  from  this,  I  would  submit  to  Dr. 
Warfldd  that  there  is  more  truth  in  the  doctrine  of  what 
is  generally  called  the  freedom  of  the  will  than  he  is  appar- 
ently ready  to  allow. 

He  charges  Mr.  Tnunbull  with  a  "  Pelagianining  doc- 
trine of  the  will"  (p.  367;  see  also  pp.  371,  373).  Here 
again  I  am  convinced  Dr.  Warfleld  has  tailed  to  recognize 
the  element  of  truth,  even  in  what  he  calls  Pelagiauiam. 
While  no  one  for  an  instant  would  wiah  to  aet  aaide  or 
nnderonphaaize  grace,  it  is  equally  true,  that,  though 
grace  cannot  be  commanded,  it  can,  unfortunately,  be  hin- 
dered; and,  so  far  as  I  can  see,  this  solemn  thought  finds 
no  adequate  recognition  at  the  hands  of  Dr.  Warfleld. 

In  more  than  one  place  Dr.  Warfleld  ia  very  severe  on 
Uethodism.  There  is  no  need  to  discuss  thia  in  detaU. 
Bat  I  will  make  bold  to  say  (iu  spite  of  my  Anglican  Au' 
guatinianiam)  that  no  system  could  live  which  did  not 
possess  and  emphasize  some  aspect  of  truth.  In  the  lif^t 
of  what  is  known  of  men  like  John  Wesley,  CSiarles  Wesl^, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


280  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

Fletcher  of  Madeley,  aod  many  more,  it  seema  imperative 
to  inquire  what  there  was  in  their  teaching  that  repre- 
sented elements  of  New  Testament  truth  and  how,  more- 
over, it  is  that  Methodism  has  become  such  a  power  at  the 
present  time. 

P.  364.  Dr.  Warfteld  speaks  of  "our  wills  being  the 
expression  of  our  hearts  continually  more  and  more  dying 
to  sin."  This  expression  strikes  me  as  curious  j  for,  so  far 
as  I  have  been  able  to  discover,  every  reference  to  our  be- 
ing "  dead "  or  "  cmcifled "  is  in  the  past  tense  and  im- 
plies a  definite  and  complete  action,  which  necessarily 
rules  out  the  idea  of  "  more  and  more  dying,"  whatever 
that  may  mean.  I  should  have  thought  it  would  have  be^i 
far  better  to  say,  like  the  Apostle  Paul,  "  ye  died  .  .  .  pat 
to  death  therefore"  (Col.  iii.  3-5).  As  Qodet  well  puts 
it,  Christian  Holiness  is  fundamentally  different  from  all 
pagan  ethics.  Paganism  says,  "  Become  what  you  ought 
to  be";  Christianity  says,  "Become  what  you  are." 

There  is,  of  course,  constant  danger  of  disproportion  in 
the  statement  of  this  truth;  but  so  there  is  in  everything 
else.  Even  Predestination,  as  taught  at  Princeton,  for  in- 
stance, can  easily  be  exaggerated  to  the  virtual  exclusion 
of  the  human  element  altogether.  But,  notwithstanding 
all  such  perils,  the  old  saying  is  just  as  true  as  ever,  that 
"  abuse  does  not  take  away  use." 

In  regard  to  deliverance  from  the  power  of  sin,  which 
is  to  be  sought  in  the  death  of  Christ  rather  than  in  any 
process-of  sanctification  wrought  in  us  by  the  Spirit,  Dr. 
Chalmers  has  a  word  which  seems  to  me  to  express  essen- 
tial truth:— 

"  The  man  who  —  riveting  all  his  confidence  in  the  death 
of  Christ  —  has  become  partaker  of  all  its  immunities  and 
of  all  its  holy  influences,  will  not  only  find  peace  from  the 
guilt  of  sin,  but  protection  from  its  tyranny.  This  faith 
win  not  only  be  to  him  a  barrier  from  the  abyss  of  its 
coming  vengeance,  but  it  will  be  to  him  a  panoply  of  de- 
fence against  its  present  ascendency  over  his  souL  The 
sure  way  to  put  Satan  to  flight  is  to  resist  him,  steadfast 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorious  Life  281 

in  this  faith,  which  Till  be  to  him  who  exercieee  it  a  shield 
to  quench  all  the  fiery  darts  of  the  advereary. 

"  We  are  aware  of  charges  of  being  strange,  and  mys- 
tical, and  imaginary,  to  which  this  representation,  how- 
ever scriptaral  it  may  be,  exposes  us.  But  we  ask,  on  the 
one  band,  those  who  have  often  been  defeated  by  the  power 
of  temptation  —  whether  they  ever  recollect,  in  a  single 
instance,  that  the  death  of  Christ,  believed  and  regarded 
and  made  use  of  in  the  way  now  explained,  was  a  weapon 
put  forth  in  the  contest  with  sin?  And  we  ask,  on  the 
other  hand,  those  who  have  made  use  of  this  weapon, 
whether  it  ever  failed  them  in  their  honest  and  faithful 
attempts  to  resist  tbe  instigations  of  evil? 

"  We  apprehend  that  the  testimonies  of  both  will  stamp 
an  experimental  as  well  as  a  Scriptaral  soundness  upon 
the  affirmation  of  my  text  that  be  who  by  .  faith  in  the 
death  of  Christ  is  freed  from  the  condemnation  of  sin,  has 
also  an  instrument  in  hie  possession  which  has  only  to  be 
plied  and  kept  in  habitual  exercise,  that  he  may  habitually 
be  free  from  its  power"  (Romans,  vol.  ii.  pp.  90 f.). 

P.  369.  In  the  footnote,  Dr.  Warfield  maintains  that 
Mr.  Trumbull  and  I  differ  in  regard  to  the  question  of 
God's  grace  at  the  time  of  sleep,  and  he  characterizes  this 
difference  as  two  doctrines  "which  stand  apart,  as  far 
apart  as  darkness  and  light;  they  are  polar  in  their  an- 
tithrais."  I  do  not  feel  at  aU  sure  of  this.  My  own  im- 
pression is  that  Mr.  Trnmbull  and  I  were  discussing  the 
question  of  sleep  in  relation  to  grace  in  two  different  con- 
nections, and,  unless  I  am  greatly  mistaken,  Mr.  Trnmbull 
would  not  for  an  instant  deny  what  Dr.  Warfield  quotes 
me  as  saying,  while  the  essential  truth  of  Mr.  Trumbull's 
contention  that  "  Christ  forces  no  spiritual  blessing  upon 
a  person  "  is  certainly  true  in  its  proper  place. 

Dr.  Warfield  more  than  once  indicates  his  strong  dis- 
approval of  the  distinction  between  conscious  and  nncon- 
sciouB  sins.  But  once  more  I  imagine  there  must  be  some 
misunderstanding  of  tbe  position  of  the  Holiness  Move- . 
ment.  When,  for  instance,  the  old  Church  Hymn,  the  "  Te 
Deum,"  says,  "  Vouchsafe,  O  Lord,  to  keep  us  this  day 
without  sin,"  there  seems  to  be  a  clear  suggestion  of  this 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


282  Bibliotheoa  Sacra  [July, 

distinction,  for  I  do  not  suppose  that  tlie  author,  or  ao- 
thore,  of  the  "  Te  Deam  "  ever  meant  to  imply  the  entire 
extirpation  or  eyen  the  gradaal  eradication  o(  the  sinful 
nature.  If  this  is  so,  then  the  thought  of  deliverance  from 
sinning  is  much  earlier  than  the  modem  Holiness  Move- 
ment In  the  same  way  when  the  English  Prayer  Book 
prays  that  "this  day  we  fall  into  no  sin,"  I  cannot  be- 
lieve that  the  Beformers  had  any  thought  of  the  entire 
removal  of  the  evil  principle,  but  only  that  the  soul  might 
be  kept  from  .conscions  wrong.  Dr.  Warfield  well  knows 
that  in  the  Jewish  economy  there  was  a  provision  for  sins 
of  ignorance,  and  it  has  always  appeared  to  me  natural  to 
suppose  that  there  was  some  corresponding  provision  in 
the  great  anti-typal  sacrifice  of  Christ  for  sins  which  Ood 
could  see,  though  they  are  for  a  time,  it  may  be  a  long 
time,  hidden  from  the  conscionsness  of  the  believer. 

On  p.  599  (October,  1918),  I>r.  Warfield  states  what  wiU 
be  perfectly  astonishing  to  many  who  are  associated  with 
this  Movement,  that  "  the  Christian's  sinning  is  made 
merely  auxiliary  and  contributory  to  his  holiness  ...  in 
the  most  literal  sense  the  Christian's  sins  become  step- 
ping-stones to  higher  things."  All  that  I  can  say  is  that 
there  is  nothing  to  warrant  such. a  surprising  statement 
in  any  of  the  books  on  Holiness  which  it  has  been  my  priv- 
ilege to  read.  I  do  not  think  it  is  right  to  make  the  &!• 
tire  Movement  responsible  for  the  utterances  of  certain 
individuals,  unless  it  can  be  proved  (as  it  cannot)  that 
the  leaders  of  the  Movement,  as  a  whole,  indorse  these  par- 
ticular views. 

P.  89  (January,  1919),  Dr.  Warfield  is  much  concerned 
about  what  he  calls  "  Perfectionism,"  and  he  maintains  that 
every  advocate  of  the  Holiness  Movement  teaches  perfec- 
tionism in  some  form ;  "  the  immediate  attainment  of  sanc- 
tiflcation  and  perfectionism  are  convertible  terms."  Let 
na  not  be  afraid  to  face  this  qnestion  of  perfectionism  anu 
inquire  what  it  really  means.  On  this  point  I  cannot  do 
better  than  quote  from  an  address  at  Keswick,  delivered 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorious  Life  283 

last  year  by  the  Rev.  W.  Y.  Pnllerton,  one  of  the  Secre- 
taries of  the  English  Baptist  Missionary  Society: — 

"  The  first  thing  is,  that  '  Keswick  *  stands  for  perfec- 
tionism. I  have  heard  that  scores  of  times,  and  so  have 
you  —  and  it  does.  But  it  does  not  stand  for  the  sort  of 
perfectionism  that  the  critic  has  in  his  mind.  The  word  per- 
fect IB  a  maligned  word.  There  are  two  words  in  the  Bible 
translated  '  perfect,'  but  neither  of  them  means  sinless- 
ness.  The  one  means  equipment  and  adjustment,  and  the 
other  full  growth;  and  adjustment  is  in  order  to  full 
growth.  But  that  does  not  mean  any  sinless  perfection 
in  the  flesh.  That  doctrine  has  nerer  been  taught  at  Kes- 
wick, and,  please  God,  it  never  will  be.  Yet  the  blessing  that 
comes  to  men  and  women,  when  fully  adjusted  to  Jesus 
Christ,  is  so  great  and  vital  that  it  is  not  surprising  that 
sometimes  people  are  apt  to  think  they  have  reached  the 
end  of  their  struggle  with  sin.  But  the  Word  of  Ood  does 
not  teach  us,  and  the  message  of  '  Keswick '  is  not,  tbat 
we  are  not  able  to  sin,  but  that  we  are  able  not  to  sin. 
Have  you  caught  that?  It  is  not  that  we  are  not  able  to 
sin,  but  it  is  that  we  are  able  not  to  sin,  if  we  keep  trnst- 
ing  the  power  that  is  placed  at  our  disposal." 

I  am  sorry  to  have  to  say  it,  but  somehow  or  other  many 
of  the  assertions  made  by  Br.  Warfleld  concerning  the 
Holiness  Movement  would  not  be  recognized  by  most  of 
the  leading  teachers.  In  addition  to  what  has  already  been 
stated,  Dr.  Warfield  actually  makes  oat  a  clergyman  to 
mean  that  "  nevertheless  he  falls  whenever  he  wishes  to 
and  Christ  does  not  keep  him  from  doing  so  "  (p.  59) .  This 
is  most  unfair  to  the  one  who  is  thus  quoted,  for,  so  far  as 
I  cao  see,  there  is  nothing  in  the  extract  to  warrant  such 
a  conclusion.  Dr.  Warfleld  objects  to  the  idea  that  when 
a  man's  trust  fails  Christ's  keeping  fails.  But  surely  some 
place  must  be  found  in  the  believer's  life  for  his  own  at- 
titude of  faithfulness.  And  if  a  man  fails  to  trust  he  is 
certainly  liable  thus  far  to  fall,  notwithstanding  Christ's 
readiness  and  ability.  It  is,  of  course,  the  old  question  of 
^e  relation  of  the  Divine  and  the  hmnan,  and  does  not 
in  any  way  involve  eternal  salvation,  but  only  the  keeping 
of  the  believer's  life.  It  is,  therefore,  true  to  say  tbat  the 
Vol.  LXXVl.    No.  8»3.    2 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


281  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July> 

believer  needs  both  Christ's  keying  and  his  own  truating 
if  he  is  to  lire  aright. 

There  is  mach  more  that  could  be  said  in  regard  to  Dr. 
"Warfleld's  strictures,  especially  the  error,  as  it  certainly 
is,  of  describing  the  Movement  as  involving  "  a  fatally  ex- 
ternalizing movement  of  thought "  and  "  with  it  a  ruinous 
underestimate  of  the  baneful  power  of  sin."  In  the  l%ht 
of  the  chapter  on  Bin  from  Mr.  Hopkins's  book,  it  is  diffi- 
cult to  understand  how  such  statemtoits  could  be  made.  It 
is  manifestly  incorrect  to  say  that  "  nothing  was  recog- 
nized as  sinning  but  deliberate  sinning,"  and  that  "  ignor- 
ance "  or  "  inadvertence  was  made  the  matter  of  Holiness  " 
(p.  81).  It  only  needs  to  be  said  that  such  statements 
would  be  met  by  the  most  earnest  and  intense  denial  on 
the  part  of  those  who  are  moat  closely  associated  with  the 
Movement  Nor  is  it  easy  to  understand  Dr.  Warfleld'a 
contention  that  the  "  Movement  natnrally  fostered  a  thin 
religious  Iif&  The  deep  things  are  not  for  it"  (p.  82).  If 
he  would  go  some  time  to  tbe  Keswick  Convention,  he 
would,  I  think,  soon  be  disabnsed  of  this  idea  of  "  a  thin 
religious  life,"  for  Keswick  has  proved  again  and  again 
its  association  with  "  the  deep  thinga." 

I  will  only  call  attention  to  one  more  of  Dr.  Warfleld'a 
serious  and,  as  I  maintain,  inaccurate  contentions,  when 
he  speaks  of  a  little  book  by  Mr.  McConkey  as  "Arminian." 
This  is  a  book  on  the  Holy  Spirit,  which  has  been  described 
by  Dr.  R.  E.  Speer  as  the  best  he  has  ever  read  on  the  sub- 
ject, and  many  more  feel  the  same  and  are  deeply  grateful 
to  Mr.  McConkey  for  what  he  has  taught  them  on  this  great 
topic.  Even  Dr.  Warfidd  admits  that  "  in  spite  of  his 
fundamental  Arminianlsm  Mr.  McConkey  believes  inT'er- 
severance."  But  it  may  be  respectfully  questioned  whether 
Dr.  Warfleld  is  not  a  little  too  apt  to  see  Arminianiam  and 
Pelagianism  and  free  will  (in  the  wrong  sense)  where  they 
do  not  really  exist.  Truth  has  more  sides  than  Dr.  War- 
fleld'a articles  would  seem  to  indicate. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victoriotis  Life 


I  have  now  gone  through  the  more  important  points  on 
which,  as  it  seems  to  me,  Dr.  Warfleld  has  either  misTiD- 
derstood  or  else  misstated  the  position  of  those  whom  he 
criticizes.  It  is  now  time  to  call  attention  to  some  of  the 
general  features  connected  with  the  Keswick  Movement 
which  comes  under  Dr.  Warfield's  severe  condemnation. 
First  of  all,  let  me  say  that,  while  the  modem  Holiness 
Movement  came  to  England  very  largely,  if  not  almost  en- 
tirely, through  Mr.  B.  Pearsall  Smith,  yet  it  is  inaccurate 
and  unfair  to  charge  aU  the  Holiness  teachers  with  any  er- 
rors or  excesses  which  may  seem  to  Dr.  Warfield  inexplica- 
bly bound  up  with  Mr.  Pearsall  Smith's  position.  Some  of 
ns  know  a  little  more  than  Dr.  Warfield  suggests,  perhaps 
more  than  he  actually  knows,  about  the  personal  circum- 
stances connected  with  the  early  days  of  the  Movement. 
There  seems  practically  no  doubt  that  the  trouble  was  one 
of  serious  indiscretion  rather  than  of  definite  wrong-doing. 
Bnt  the  fact  that  the  leader  was  thus  set  aside,  and  that 
the  Movement  has  gone  on  from  strength  to  strength  until 
the  present  day,  ia  to  many  of  us  a  clear  proof  that  it  was 
not  of  man  but  of  God.  With  r^ard  to  Mr.  Pearsall 
Smith  himself,  it  may  perhaps  be  permissible  to  call  at- 
tention to  a  letter  which  qaite  recently  appeared  in  the 
English  paper,  The  Life  of  Faith : — 

"  It  was  R.  PearsaU  Smith  to  whom,  under  Qod,  so  many 
owe  a  great  deliverance  from  sin's  dominion.  Humanly 
speaking,  but  for  him  there  would  probably  have  been  no 
Conventions,  beginning  with  that  at  Oxford,  extending  to 
Brighton,  and  spreading  all  over  the  kingdom,  of  which 
the  Conyentions  at  Keswick  are  best  known,  as  they  have 
a  world-wide  influence.  I  have  lately  been  re-reading  his 
book,  '  Walk  in  the  Light,'  with  mucb  pleasure,  and  my 
feeling  is  that  a  new  edition  of  this  work  should  be  brought 
out,  as  I  think  many  would  find  help  and  profit  therefrom. 
I  quote  a  sentence  from  the  Preface  wbicb,  I  think,  will 
prove  how  free  Mr.  Pearsall  Smith  really  was  from  the 
errors  attributed  by  some  people  to  bim.  '  Though  we  have 
not  an  absolute,  unconditional  sinleasneas,  it  is  an  incal- 
culable  blessing   and   strength   to   the  believer  to  have  a 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


286  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jul?) 

happ7  heart  free  from  all  kuovn  sin;  a  heart  bow  able 
to  accept  the  coDsciousnefis  that  ChriBt  does  indeed  cleanse 
"  from  all "  ain,  and  dwell  In  the  pnrified  temple  of  the 
being.  To  this  faith  brought  us ;  in  this  faith  keeps  us.  A 
lapse  of  faith  would  restore  oar  old  condition  of  cooscions 
inward  evil  and  outward  trespass'  (p.  8).  I  well  remem- 
ber one  of  his  expressions,  '  But  the  blood  still  cleanses, 
the  bread  from  heaven  still  sustains,  and  the  faith  once 
delivered  to  the  saints  still  gives  victory.'  I  feel  that  many- 
thousands  who  have  been  definitely  helped  in  the  expe- 
rience of  the  grace  of  the  Lord  Jeans  little  know  how  mnch 
they  owe  to  '  B.  P.  8.'  for  the  life  more  abundant  that  they 
enjoy." 

This  will  show  at  least  something  of  what  many  feel  Id 
regard  to  indebtedness  to  Mr.  Pearsall  Smith.  But  leaving 
him  entirely  on  one  Fide,  I  should  like  to  call  attention  to 
a  book  which  Dr.  Warfleld  does  not  seem  to  know,  though 
it  i-epresents  Keswick  as  perhaps  no  other  volume  does  or 
can.  It  is  called  "  The  Keswick  Convention :  Its  Message, 
Its  Method,  and  Its  Men."  It  was  published  several  years 
ago  and  consists  of  about  twenty  chapters,  contributed  by 
various  men  of  the  Keswick  platform ;  and  all  who  wish  to 
know  what  the  Movement  means  should  give  their  careful 
attention  to  this  book.  It  is  only  possible  for  me  to  call 
attention  to  some  of  those  aspects  of  the  Movement  which 
are  perhaps  not  well  known  on  this  side  of  the  Atlantic. 

The  fotmder  of  the  Keswick  Convention  was  Canon  Hiir- 
ford-Batteraby,  Vicar  of  St.  John's  Church,  Keswick,  Cum- 
berland, who  received  such  a  spiritual  blessing  from  the 
Oxford  Conference  of  187'i  that  on  his  return  home  he 
started  a  Conference  in  his  own  parish  which  has  devel- 
oped into  the  great  world-wide  Movement  of  to-day.  Canon 
Harford-Battersby  was  a  loyal  Evangelical  clergjrman  be- 
fore he  went  to  Oxford,  and  on  his  return  home  be  was 
asked  what  he  had  learnt  that  was  new  at  that  gathering. 
He  relied :  "  I  learnt  the  difference  between  a  struggling 
and  a  resting  faith." 

It  has  been  my  privilege  to  meet  at  Keswick  quite  a 
number  of  Scottish  Presbyterians,  lihe  Dr.  Elder  Cum- 
ming  of  Glasgow,  Dr.  John  Smith  and  Dr.  George  Wilson 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorious  Life  287 

of  Edinbargh,  and  several  more.  Nothing  in  its  way  ig 
more  impreesive  than  the  experience  of  these  Scottish 
brethren  who,  with  their  strong,  intellectual,  Calvinistic 
Presbyterianisro,  found  in  the  Keswick  teaching  jnst  that 
element  of  spiritual  glow  and  experience  which  gave  force 
and  freshness  to  their  rich 'theological  equipment.  Those 
who  knew  some  of  these  men  beiore  going  to  Keswick,  and 
their  life  and  ministry  afterwards,  will  bear  testimony  to 
the  reality  of  the  change;  and,  as  Dr.  Warfleld  knows,  they 
were  aboot  as  far  removed  from  what  he  would  call  Ap- 
minianism  as  anyone  could  be. 

On  one  occasion  Dr.  Horatins  Bonar  was  prevailed  upon 
to  listen  to  an  address  on  Christian  Holiness  from  the  Bev. 
Evan  Hopkins,  to  whom  reference  has  already  been  made. 
It  wa»  known  that  Dr.  Bonar  was  strongly  opposed  to  the 
Keswick  view,  and  after  the  address  be  said  to  Mr.  Hop- 
kins :  "  I  agree  with  all  that  you  have  said,  but  it  is  lop- 
sided truth ;  what  is  wanted  is  all-round  truth."  To  which 
Mr.  Hopkins  replied :  "  This  is  true,  because  we  have  to 
do  with  lop-sided  Christians,  but,  when  we  have  got  them 
back  into  the  centre,  we  give  them  all-round  truth." 

Only  last  year  a  missionary  from  Africa,  on  his  first 
risit  to  the  Convention,  gave  this  impression: — 

"Keswick  makes  no  claims  to  be  an  end  in  itself;  it  is 
only  the  means  by  which  men  are  helped  into  closer  touch 
with  the  mighty  power  of  God,  and  encouraged  to  claim 
that  power  for  every  need  of  the  soul.  It  is  the  idea  of 
Christ  trusted  fully  —  yea,  more,  used  fully  —  that  day  by 
day  we  may  be  more  than  conquerors  through  Him  tliat 
loved  us.  It  is  the  teaching  of  the  surrendered  life,  sur- 
rendered to  Christ  in  order  that  Christ  may  empower  it 
and  use  it  more  fully  and  fruitfully  in  His  service;  it  is 
the  teaching  of  efficiency  in  the  higbest  sense,  and  for  the 
highest  ends." 

This  is  how  Mr!  Hopkins  puts  the  truth  which  is  taught 
at  Kesvrick: — 

"  First,  we  would  say  we  believe  it  is  the  distinct  tes- 
timony of  the  Scripture  that  we  can  never  in  this  life  say 
we  have  no  sin. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


286  Bibliotheca  Sacra 

"  We  accept  those  words  of  1  John  i.  8  as  referring  to 
belierers,  to  Christians  even  in  the  highest  stages  of  the 
Divine  life.  The  Apostle,  we  believe,  included  himself  in 
that  statement:  '  If  we  say  we  have  no  sin  we  deceive  our- 
selves.' 

"And  jet,  while  this  is  true,  the  Scripture  teaches  with 
equal  clearness  that  we  may  'walk  with  a  conscience  void 
of  offence.  We  may  know,  and  ought  to  know,  what  it  is 
to  be  '  cleansed  from  all  unrighteousness.'  We  may,  and 
ought  to  be  living,  in  the  realization  of  that  condition 
which  onr  Lord  intended  when  He  pronounced  that  Beati- 
tude, '  Blessed  are  the  pure  iu  heart ;  for  they  shall  see 
God.' " 

In  order  to  make  this  as  clear  as  possible,  I  must  again 
use  Mr.  Hopkins,  who,  in  one  of  bis  booklets,  has  the  fol- 
lowing : — 

"  Does  anyone  ask,  '  What  have  you  lately  received 
which  you  did  not  possess  before?'  I  answer,  as  to  my 
standing  in  Christ  nothing;  as  to  doctrine  nothing.  But 
I  have  been  made  to  see  that  Christ  can  as  fully  meet  my 
need  as  to  walk  as  He  has  as  to  standiug;  that  He  is  as 
truly  my  Sanctification  as  He  is  my  Bighteousness." 

Another  testimony  to  Keswick  has  just  apeared  in  an 
English  paper  from  Dr.  A.  T.  Schofleld,  a  well-known  Lon- 
don Doctor,  who  belongs  to  the  "  Brethren  " : — 

"A  want  of  balance  in  the  spiritual  mind  is  not  unfre- 
qnently  the  result  of  a  want  of  balance  of  truth  or  of  dis- 
torted or  one-sided  views.  Another  point  may  be  noted, 
and  that  is  that  the  higher  the  spiritual  life  the  more 
closely  should  its  essential  sanity  and  reasonableness  be 
safeguarded.  Otherwise,  we  get  tiie  disastrous  product  of 
cranks  and  faddists  instead  of  spiritual  Christians.  Kes- 
wick, as  a  leading  school  of  higher  spiritual  life,  most  for- 
tunately is  keenly  alive  to  this.  Their  teaching  is  twofold, 
and  the  second  half  preserves  Christian  sanity.  'First  of 
all,'  they  say,  '  we  have  to  make  natural  men  into  spiritual; 
and  then  spiritual  men  into  natural.'  It  is  thus  the  bal- 
ance is  maintained.  No  one  can  carefully  read  St.  Paul's 
Epistles  without  being  immensely  struck  with  the  Apos- 
tle's anxiety  and  care  to  maintain  spiritual  health  in  this 
respect," 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE    FUNDAMENTAL    DIFFERENCES    BETWEEN 
PRE-  AND  P0ST-MILLENAEIAN8 

FROFBSSOR   DAVID    A.    HCCLBNAHAN,  D.D. 
PITTSBUBOH,   PBNNSTLVANIA 

What  is  tbe  fundameDtal  difference  between  a  premil- 
lenariau  and  a  poatmiUenariaii  ? 

1.  It  is  not  that  tliere  is  to  be  a  second  advent.  Both 
premUlenarians  and  postmillenariana  believe  in  a  second 
advent.  We  differ  as  to  tlie  pnrpose  of  that  advent,  bat 
not  as  to  the  fact  of  it. 

2.  It  is  not  that  we  are  to  be  watchfal  for  our  Lord's 
coming.  Both  believe  that  we  should  be.  We  differ  as  to 
tbe  meaning  of  watching,  bnt  not  as  to  the  fact  of  it. 

3.  It  is  not  as  to  whether  Christ  wUl  have  a  kiogdom, 
and  that  the  saints  will  share  with  Him  in  that  reign.  We 
both  believe  that.  We  differ  as  to  the  nature  of  that  king- 
dom, but  not  as  to  the  fact  of  it. 

4.  It  is  not  even  that  the  saints  are  to  reign  with  Christ 
on  this  earth.  Many  people  believe  that  heaven  is  to  be 
on  this  earth  after  it  is  rejuvenated,  redeemed,  and  glori- 
fied, who  hold  nothing  in  common  with  premillenarians. 
Thousands  have  believed  this,  and  thousands  still  believe 
this  who  are  not  premiUenarians. 

5.  It  is  not  that  there  is  to  be  a  period  at  the  end 
of  this  world  when  righteousness  will  be  absolutely  tri- 
umphant Neither  premillenarians  nor  postmillenarians 
believe  this.  A  premillenarian  believes  that,  even  after 
Christ  reigns  a  thousand  years  upon  this  earth,  there 
will  still  be  much  evil  in  the  world  for  Satan  to  work 
on  when  he  is  loosed  by  Christ,  and  that  there  will  follow 
the  awful  period  of  the  final  apostasy.  A  pOBtmillenarian 
believes  that  the  world  will  be  Christianized  by  the  influ- 
ences of  the  gospel  before, the  Second  Advent;  but  that 
there  will  still  be  much  evil  in  the  world  to  be  separated 
from  the  good  when  Christ  comes.    A  premillenarian  does 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


290  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

Dot  know  how  fnlly  the  world  will  be  Christianised  by  the 
personal  reign  of  Christ,  although  he  has  aU  those  hun- 
dreds of  texts  of  Scripture  which  foretell  the  golden  age. 
A  postmUleuarian  does  not  know  how  fully  the  world  will 
be  Christianized  by  the  teaching  of  the  gospel,  althoogb 
he  has  all  those  same  hundreds  of  texts  of  Scripture  which 
foretell  the  golden  age. 

6.  It  is  not  as  to  whether  there  will  be  one  resurrection 
or  two  resurrections  a  thousand  years  apart,  although  this 
Is  an  important  difference  between  the  two  schools  of 
thought.  Premilienarians  base  their  belief  In  two  resur- 
rections on  one  Scripture  text,  and  that  text  found  in  the 
most  symbolical  book  in  the  Bible,  and  in  the  most  sym- 
bolical section  of  tbe  l>ook.  PostmiUenarians  base  their 
belief  in  one  resurrection  on  scores  of  plain  texts  in  all 
of  which  tbe  resurrections  of  both  the  righteous  and  the 
wicked  are  represented  as  occurring  at  the  end  of  the 
world  and  at  one  and  the  same  time. 

TWO   FUNDAMENTAL   DIFFBRBNCES 

There  are  two  fundamental  differences  between  premil- 
lenarianism  and  postmillenarianism.  The  one  is  as  to  the 
nature  of  that  kingdom,  whether  it  is  carnal  or  whetber  it 
is  spiritual ;  and  the  other  is  as  to  the  power  and  purpose 
of  the  gospel  in  connection  with  that  kingdom. 

1.  Premilienarians  believe  that  Christ  is  coming  back 
to  this  earth  to  set  up  the  old  Jewish  kingdom  and  to  rule 
over  it.  Jerusalem  is  to  be  the  capital  of  the  world.  The 
Jews  are  to  be  the  foremost  people  in  the  world ;  all  other 
Christians  are  to  be  simply  adopted  citizens,  and  to  oc- 
cupy a  lower  place  than  the  Jews.  The  Jewish  nation  will 
have  a  priestly  function  not  accorded  to  other  Christian 
people;  they  will  be  the  Lord's  special  agents  in  the 
evangelization  of  the  world;  they  will  have  a  preeminent 
work  to  do  over  and  above  the  ordinary  citizen ;  and  this 
preeminence  will  continue  through  the  thousand  years 
which  they  believe  Christ  will  reign  on  the  Jewish  throne ; 
and  the  Jewish  convert  will  hold  a  higher  place  in  privi- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Poat-mUlenariant  291 

le^  and  service  than  the  privilege  and  service  of  the 
American  or  European  Christian  who  is  not  a  descendant 
of  Abraham.  They  believe  that  in  this  carnal  Jewish  state 
the  old  Jewish  worship  will  be  established  and  maintained 
under  the  direction  of  Christ  the  reigning  king. 

In  "The  Prophetic  Stndies  of  the  International  Pro- 
phetic Conference  held  in  Chicago  in  1886,"  the  late  Dr. 
Nathaniel  West  said,  as  recorded  on  pages  122  and  123: 
"First,  middle,  and  last,  'salvation  is  of  the  Jews,'  emi- 
nent in  each  epoch-making  node  of  evolution  in  the  king- 
dom of  God,  .  .  .They  alone  of  aU  nations  are  charged  with 
this  mission  to  the  world." 

In  the  Premillennial  Prophetic  Conference  held  in 
Chicago  in  1914,  Rev.  A.  C.  Oaebelein  said,  as  found  on 
page  187  of  "The  Coming  and  Kingdom  of  Christ":  "All 
nations  are  yet  to  know  the  glory  of  the  Lord,  bnt 
world-conversion  is  possible  only  after  Israel  is  converted. 
Through  Israel  all  nations  of  the  earth  will  be  blessed." 
On  page  195  he  says:  "  There  is  no  such  thing  at  this  pres- 
ent time  as  saving  the  masses  or  converting  the  world.  The 
masses  will  be  saved  and  the  world  converted  through  the 
preaching  of  the  Jews." 

The  Bev.  Dr.  I.  M.  Haldeman,  a  prominent  writer  on 
the  premillennial  side,  says  in  bis  book  *'  The  Coming  of 
Christ":  "To  them  [Premillenarians]  the  Jews  and  the 
Gentiles  are  as  far  apart  in  the  dealings  of  Ood  and  the 
blessings  which  sball  come  to  each  from  Bim,  as  the  throne 
of  God  is  distant  from  His  footstool"  (p.  14). 

Poatmillenarians  believe  that  wben  Christ  came  the  first 
time  He  did  away  with  all  differences  between  Jews  and 
Gentiles.  They  believe  that  Paul  was  representing  his 
Lord  when  he  said :  "  There  can  be  neither  Jew  nor  Greek 
.  .  .  for  ye  are  all  one  man  in  Christ  Jesus.  And  if  ye  are 
Christ's,  then  are  ye  Abraham's  seed,  heirs  according  to 
promise." 

That  premillenarians  believe  that  in  this  Jewish  state 
the  old  Jewish  sacrifices  (the  burnt  offeringH.  peace  offer- 
ings, sin  offerings,  etc.)  will  be  re^tablished,  and  the  old 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


292  BUliotheca  Sacra  [Jiilyr 

Jewish  feasts  (the  Passover,  the  Feast  of  Weeks,  etc.), 
there  can  be  no  question.  It  seems  scarcely  believable  that 
good  Christian  men  and  women  will  accept  and  hold  to  a 
^stem  of  interpretation  that  compels  them  to  believe  that 
the  Gharch,  under  Christ's  own  leadership,  will  go  back 
to  what  Paul  calls  the  carnal  ordinances  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament dispensation ;  but  so  it  is.  They  base  these  views 
on  their  interpretation  of  such  passages  as  Ezek.  xliii.- 
xlv.  and  other  prophecies.  The  Bev.  Dr.  G.  Campbell  Mor- 
gan, in  his  book  "  Ood's  Metbod  witb  Man,"  has  a  chart  in 
which  he  represents  the  sacrifices  of  the  Old  Testament 
by  a  red  line.  At  the  point  in  his  chart  where  he  repre- 
sents Christ  as  coming  for  the  resurrection  of  the  saints, 
he  makes  this  red  line  reappear,  and  extend  tbrough  a  pe- 
riod of  a  thousand  years,  during  which  be  believes  that 
Christ  will  reign  on  a  literal  throne  in  Jerusalem;  yes, 
and  to  extend  through  both  the  rapture  period  and  tbe 
final  apostasy  period.  Dr.  Uorgan  then  explains  that  this 
red  line  represeots  the  sacrifices. 

Qeorge  Dickison,  In  his  book  "  The  Second  Advent  '* 
(1913),  says:  "Another  striking  feature  of  the  miUennium, 
looked  at  from  the  point  of  view  of  this  Christian  dispen- 
sation, will  be  that  of  a  sacrificial  service  and  priesthood, 
which  is  to  be  established,  such  as  was  in  Israelitish  times. 
.  .  .  The  sacrificial  system  which  will  have  to  be  observed 
during  the  millenninm  (see  Ezek.  xlvi.  4,  15,  20)  >  in  a  mea- 
sure may  take  the  place  of  the  Lord's  Supper  as  it  is  ob- 
served in  the  present  dispensation"  (p.  153). 

The  Rev.  W.  B,  Eiley,  D.D.,  who  read  two  papers  be- 
fore the  PremUIennial  Conference  held  in  Chicago  in  1914, 
in  his  book  "  The  Evolution  of  the  Kingdom,"  argues  for 
the  reSstabliahmeot  of  the  sacrifices.  He  says:  "Might  it 
not  be,  that  witb  the  symbolic  ordinances  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, reinstituted  in  the  mUlennium,  the  Jews  themselvea 
would  be  put  in  a  place  of  peculiar  power,  as  evangelists, 
in  presenting  the  perfect  fulfilment  of  tbe  Old  Testament 
to  be  found  in  Christ  in  the  New?  Is  truth  any  the  less 
^iritnal  when  it  becomes  incarnate?"  (p.  48). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Post-millenariant  293 

David  D.  Butledge,  in  his  800-page  book,  "  Christ,  Anti- 
christ, and  BiUlenniuin,"  says :  "  We  therefore  infer  that 
when  the  Jews  return  to  Palestine  and  the  Lord  Jesus  shall 
sit  on  the  throne  of  David,  there  is  no  reason,  as  far  as 
Christianity  is  concerned,  why  some  at  least  of  the  more 
important  Jewish  feasts  should  not  be  continued.  We  have 
seen  that  the  rite  of  circumcision  certainly  will  be  con- 
tinaed.  This  view  receives  its  confirmation  from  the  book 
of  Ezekiel.  ...  In  the  forty-third  chapter  we  have  the  ded- 
ication of  the  attar,  after  which  memorial  offerings  and 
peace-offeringa  shall  be  continued.  ...  In  the  forty-fifth 
chapter  we  find  the  passover  will  be  continued  as  one  of 
the  feasts  of  the  millennial  period,"  etc. 

Such  quotations  could  be  continued.  No  premillenarian 
who  has  ever  written  on  this  point  has  denied  that  the 
refistablishment  of  the  Old  Testament  sacrifices  is  logi- 
cally and  sarely  bound  up  with  premillennial  interpretation 
of  prophecy.  Last  August  <ldl8),  at  a  Prophetic  Confer- 
ence at  Lake  Winona,  in  which  both  sides  of  the  millen- 
nial question  were  discussed  for  eight  days,  and  at  which 
the  author  of  tbis  paper  made  five  addresses,  Dr.  James  M. 
Gray,  of  the  Moody  Bible  Institute,  said,  in  answer  to  a 
written  question,  that  "  some  of  these  sacrifices  would  be 
offered  by  the  returned  Jews,  and  some  of  them  by  other 
members  of  the  kingdom  during  the  millennium,  as  a  kind 
of  memorial." 

This  is  one  of  the  fundamental  differences  between  the 
two  schools  of  thought.  Few  premillennialists  ever  speak 
of  this  phase  of  the  question  in  public.  They  seem  to  be 
ashamed  to  own  it  as  a  part  of  their  belief,  but  every 
well-informed  premillenarian  knows  that  it  is  bound  op 
with  tbeir  system  of  interpretation  of  prophecy,  and  every 
writer  who  has  been  frank  enough  to  discuss  the  point  has 
declared  it  to  be  a  logical  part  of  his  belief.  I  challenge 
any  one  to  quote  a  single  premillennial  book-writer  who 
has  ever  denied  that  it  is  a  pari  of  the  system. 

This  point  emphasizes  the  fact  of  the  temporal  and  cai^ 
nal  character  of  the  millennia!  kingdom.  It  is  a  Judaistic 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


291  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [J<ily» 

kingdom.  The  Jews  are  to  be  to  the  front;  it  U  the  old 
Jewish  kingdom  that  is  to  be  set  up,  and  the  old  Jewish 
eacriflces  and  Jewish  feasts  that  are  to  prevail.  As  op- 
posed to  this  carnal  view,  postmillenarians  believe  in  a 
spiritual  kingdom,  with  Christ  reigning  in  the  hearts  and 
lives  of  His  people.  This  is  an  important  difference  be- 
tween premillenariana  and  postmillenarians :  it  is  one  of 
the  two  fundamental  differences. 

2.  Premillenarians  and  postmillenarians  differ  widely 
in  their  conception  of  the  power  of  the  gosp^  and  the  pur- 
pose of  Ood  in  this  dispensation.  Premillenarians  do  not 
believe  that  the  world  will  be  converted  by  the  preaching 
of  the  gospel.  They  hold  that  nothing  but  Christ's  per- 
sonal presence  as  a  reigning  king  in  Jerusalem  will  save 
the  world.  In  their  view,  the  gospel  as  a  world-saver  is 
a  failure.  Even  though  the  Holy  Spirit  is  here  to  help 
on  the  gospel  in  its  saving  work,  yet  but  little  progress  will 
be  made  towards  saving  the  world.  They  think  that  the 
Church  as  a  whole,  instead  of  advancing,  is  retrograding, 
and  will  continue  to  retrograde  until  Christ  comes  again 
to  stop  the  downward  trend.  Notwithstanding  the  preach- 
ing of  thousands  of  clergymen  and  the  work  of  millions 
of  Christiana,  the  Church  is  getting  worse  and  worse.  Not- 
withstanding all  the  uplifting  influences  of  Christianity, 
the  world  is  actually  going  back  instead  of  forward. 

TESTIMONY  OF  PRE UILLBN ASIANS  ON   THIS   POINT 

Rev.  Dr.  A.  J.  Frost,  one  of  the  speakers  at  the  Chicago 
Convention  of  1886,  used  this  language: — 

"  Premillenarians  maintain  that  the  church  and  the 
world  are  destined  to  grow  morally  worse  until  the  end 
of  the  age.  .  .  .  [We]  as  firmly  believe  that  this  dispensa- 
tion will  end  in  diabolical  wickedness  and  well-nigh  uni- 
versal apostasy  amid  the  crash  of  Apocalyptic  thunder  and 
the  unparalleled  judgments  of  God.  .  -  .  We  shall  endeavor 
to  show  that  the  sacred  writers  in  the  Old  and  New  Tes- 
tament scriptures  foretold  this  state  of  moral  declension 
and  religious  apostasy.  With  unerring  wisdom  through 
divine  inspirations  they  predicted  that  this  dispensation, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Post-millenariang  295 

like  all  that  .had  preceded  it,  would  close  in  utter  failure 
of  men's  hopes  to  redeem  the  world  b;  the  preaching  of 
the  gospel.  ...  If  then  the  condition  of  the  church  and  the 
world  at  the  close  of  this  dispensation  is  to  be  that  of  well- 
nigh  univerBal  apostasy  and  judgment,  does  it  not  follow 
that  the  nominal  church  and  the  world  are  certain  to  grow 
worse  and  worse?  .  .  .  Does  an;  one  believe  that  more  than 
one-half  the  protestant  members  have  even  been  bom  of 
God  ?  ...  If  Christ  is  not  to  return  till  this  world  is  con- 
verted by  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  He  will  never  return 
until  eternal  ages  toU  away.  .  .  .  This  dispensation  is  des- 
tined to  grow  worse  and  worse.  .  .  .  What  is  the  moral  con- 
dition of  the  church  and  the  world  to-day?  We  believe  it 
to  be  growing  worse  and  worse." 

In  that  great  convention  of  premillenarians  there  was 
not  one  who  challenged  these  statements. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Haldeman,  in  his  book  "  The  Coming  of 
Christ,"  used  these  words:  "The  Postmilleunialist  looks 
upon  this  hour  as  the  time  of  victory  for  God.  The  Pre- 
mUlennialist  looks  upon  it  as  the  hour  in  which  the  dark- 
ness in  man  and  the  evU  in  Satan  are  holding  high  car- 
nival" (p.  13).  "They  [Premillenarians]  do  not  expect 
the  world  to  be  converted  by  the  gospel,  and  peace  brought 
in  through  its  instrumentality;  on  the  contrary, they  expect 
rather  that  the  world  will  grow  more  and  mora  indifferent 
to  that  gospel ;  that  iniquity  wiU  abound,  lawlessness  pre- 
vail, and  that  so  far  from  beating  swords  into  plough- 
shares, the  nations  will  tnm  the  ploughshares  into  swords; 
.  .  .  that  the  professing  Church  will  grow  more  and  more 
corrupt  in  doctrine  and  worldly  practice,  until  the  Son  of 
God,  rejecting  it  as  His  witness  on  the  earth,  shall  spew 
it  from  His  mouth"  (p.  3). 

Dr.  UoTgan  says :  "  I  sigh  for  the  coming  of  the  angela. 
I  feel  increasingly  that  the  government  of  men  is  a  disas- 
trous failure,  and  will  be  to  the  end." 

The  Bev.  Dr.  George  S.  Bishop,  at  the  Chicago  Confer- 
ence in  1886,  said :  "  The  Scriptures  declare  that  the  world, 
the  natural  order  around  us,  moves  on  a  descending  scale, 
grows  worse  and  worse.  .  .  .  Outwardly  things  may  seem  to 
improve.  Foolish  men  and  even  ministers,  foolish  in  this,. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


296  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jul;, 

however  they  may  laugh  at  oar  wisdom  Id  other  depart- 
ments, may  talk  of  progreasive  perfeotioo.  .  .  .  The  world 
is  growing  worse  and  worse.  All  the  while  Tubal  Cain 
was  hammering  out  his  new  machinery,  and  Jubal  was 
building  his  big  organs,  the  world  was  growing  worse  and 
worse,  and  preparing  for  the  deluge,  and  so  it  is  now.  Na- 
ture grows  worse  and  worse.  The  natural  man  grows 
worse  and  worse.  .  .  .  Deterioration  is  the  rule  of  the  times 
of  the  Oentiles." 

In  speaking  of  the  march  of  the  church  of  Jesus  Christ 
toward  the  millennium,  Dr.  Riley  said:  "The  music  of 
that  march  has  in  it  a  minor  k^;  it  sonnds  more  like  a 
fnneral  dirge  than  a  victorious  blast"  (p.  44). 

Dr.  Morgan,  in  one  of  his  latest  books,  "  Sunrise,"  has 
these  words :  "  There  is  a  wide-spread  opinion  that  the 
.work  of  the  Charch  is  the  conversion  of  the  world.  . . .  Now, 
as  a  matter  of  fact,  there  is  not  a  single  command  of  Jesus 
which  warrants  us  in  believing  that  the  responsibility  of 
the  Church  is  the  conversion  of  the  world.  The  Church  is 
called  to  the  work  of  evangelizing  the  world ;  but  not  by  a 
single  parable  of  Jesus,  nor  by  one  sentence  in  His  teach- 
ing, did  He  ever  give  us  to  understand  that,  as  a  result  of 
the  Chnrch's  mission,  the  world  would  be  saved"  (p.  33). 
Note  the  difference  Dr.  Moi^n  makes  between  converting 
the  world  and  evangelizing  it. 

Rev.  Dr.  E.  M.  Milligan,  in  his  pamphlet  "A  Statement 
of  Premillenarian  Beliefs"  (1917),  says;  "During  this 
age,  then,  God's  plan  is  not  the  conversion  of  the  world, 
bot  rather  its  evangelization  through  the  efforts  of  those 
who  are  willing  to  be  His  witnesses  and  to  endure  hard- 
ness as  good  soldiers  of  Jesus  Christ."  Note  the  fact  that 
Dr.  Milligan  makes  a  positive  difference  between  evangel- 
izing the  world  and  converting  it.  Again,  he  says :  "  Be- 
fore the  end  [of  this  age]  cotnes,  the  gospel  of  the  kingdom 
shall  be  preached  in  all  the  world,  not  with  any  expecta- 
tion of  converting  the  nations,  but  rather  as  a  witness 
onto  them  so  that  they  shall  be  left  without  excuse " 
(p.  13). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Poat-millenariana  297 

A  premillenarian  sends  missionariee,  not  with  any  ex- 
pectation of  converting  many  of  the  heathen,  but  so  ttiat 
they  may  be  left  without  excuBe.  Dr.  Miliigan  Bays :  "  The 
Spirit's  mission  is  not  to  convert  the  world,  but  rather  to 
convict  the  world  of  sin  and  righteonaness  and  of  judg- 
ment to  come"  (p.  24). 

The  late  beloved  Rev.  Dr.  S.  H.  Kellogg  made  an  ad- 
dress in  the  great  New  York  Premillennial  Conference 
on  the  subject  "Christ's  Coming:  Is  it  Pre-millennial?" 
In  commenting  on  Matt.  zxiv.  14,  he  said :  "  '  This  Qospel 
of  the  kingdom  shall  be  preached  in  all  the  world,'  not  for 
its  conversion.  Why  did  the  Lord  not  say  so  if  that  were 
indeed  the  object?  —  but,  'for  a  witness  unto  all  nations, 
and  then'  —  without  waiting  for  a  general  conversion  of 
the  nations  — '  then  shall  the  end  come.'  All  nations  must 
hear,  and  then  shall  the  end  come.  To  sum  up  the  ar- 
gument, we  may  safely  say  that  in  the  whole  Bible  among 
the  formal  statements  of  the  object  of  the  preaching  of  the 
Gospel  by  Christ's  ministers,  there  is  not  a  single  one  which 
states  that  object  to  be  the  conversion  of  the  world  to 
God."  Is  not  that  a  strange  statement  for  a  speaker  to 
make  in  a  great  conference  of  Bible  students?  and  is  it 
not  strange  that,  ho  far  as  the  records  state,  there  was  not 
one  premillenarian  present  who  took  exception  to  the  state- 
ment? They  all  seem  to  want  to  forget  Matt,  xxviii.  18 
and  20 :  *'  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all  na- 
tions, and  baptize  them,"  etc. 

BBUBP    or    P08THILLDNAR1ANS 

Over  against  this  minimizing  of  the  power  of  the  gospel, 
postmillenarians  believe  that  the  world  will  be  saved  by 
the  preaching  of  the  gospel  and  the  uplifting  influences  of 
Christianity;  that  the  Church  and  the  world  are  by  these 
influences  getting  better  and  better;  and  that  under  these 
influences  they  will  continue  to  get  better  until  the  end. 
They  believe  that  it  is  Christ's  plan  to  save  the  world 
through  the  influence  of  the  gospel.  Here  is  the  plan  as 
He  laid  it  down.   He  made  atonement  by  His  suffering  and 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


298  BibUotkeca,  Sacra  [Jaly» 

death;  He  ascended  to  heaven  and  took  a  seat  at  Ood'g 
right  band ;  from  His  throne  in  heaven  He  directs  the  work 
of  the  church  here  on  earth,  but  always  in  harmony  with 
man's  freedom  to  respond  or  to  refuse.  First  of  all,  He 
sends  His  ministers  -with  the  gospel  message;  He  sends 
the  Holy  Spirit  in  converting  and  assisting  power  to  the 
Church  and  its  members ;  He  Himself  by  His  Spirit  comes 
and  dwells  in  His  followers.  Through  the  gospel  and  these 
powerful  tnfliienrftH  He  planned  to  save  the  world. 

cheist'b  plan 

Now  what  ia  there  to  indicate  that  this  is  Christ's  plan  ? 
First,  He  said :  "  It  is  expedient  for  you  that  1  go  away ; 
for  if  I  go  not  away,  the  Comforter  will  not  come  unto  you ; 
but  if  I  go,  I  will  send  him  unto  you"  (John  xvi.  7).  Did 
not  Christ  say  that  this  was  the  better  plan  for  them?  Sec- 
ondly, He  said  that  He  would  send  the  Holy  Spirit  to  help 
them;  and  Pentecost  was  a  demonstration  that  He  was, 
and  is,  keeping  His  promisa  Thirdly,  after  His  crucifizion 
and  resurrection  He  gave  some  final  directions  to  his 
followers  as  to  the  work  of  His  church.  What  were  these 
directions?  Th^  are  contained  in  His  great  commission ; — 

"All  authority  hath  been  given  unto  me  in  heaven  and 
on  earth.  Qo  ye,  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all  the 
nations,  baptizing  them  into  the  name  of  the  Father  and 
of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit:  teaching  them  to  ob- 
serve all  things  whatsoever  I  commanded  you:  and  lo,  I 
am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world  "  (Matt. 
ixviii.  18-20). 

Notice  what  He  says  in  this  commission : — 

1.  "  Go  .  .  .  and  make  disciples  of  all  the  nations."  This 
is  no  mere  "  evangelizing,"  as  premiUenarians  use  that 
term ;  it  is  making  disciples  of  them ;  for  He  immediately 
adds  "  baptizing  them  into  the  name  of  Father  and.  of  the 
Son  and  of  the  Holy  Spirit."  Did  Christ  or  the  apostles 
ever  give  direction  to  baptize  any  one  until  he  gave  evi- 
dence of  conversion  by  the  acceptance  of  Jesus  as  his  Lord? 
Well,  then,  if  the  apostles  were  directed  to  baptize  these 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Poat-mUlenarians  299 

people  of  all  nations,  He  surely  had  in  mind  that  they  vere 
to  be  converted;  they  were  really  to  accept  Jesus  as  their 
Lord,  and  then  to  be  baptized.  Is  there  any  defect  in  this 
reasoning? 

2,  Furthermore,  after  having  been  received  into  the 
church  by  baptism,  they  were  to  be  instructed,  "  teaching 
tbem  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  commanded  yon." 
Is  not  that  the  program  of  the  Christian  church?  Preach 
the  gospel,  and  when  the  people  are  converted  receive  them 
into  the  church  by  baptism,  and  then  instruct  them  fnlly 
as  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Scriptures? 

3.  The  gospel  was  the  means  they  were  to  use;  they 
were  to  preach  Jesus. 

i.  He  promised  to  be  with  His  disciples  in  this  work 
of  converting,  baptizing,  and  instmcting,  even  until  the 
end  of  the  world.  "And  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even 
onto  the  end  of  the  world."  That  is  a  great  program :  go 
and  make  Christians,  and  baptize  them,  and  instruct  them, 
and  do  it  in  the  assurance  tliat  I  am  with  you  in  the  whole 
program.  How  could  the  work  ultimately  fail  when  their 
Lord  had  commanded  them  to  do  it,  and  when  Christ  by 
His  own  promise  is  to  be  with  them? 

5.  Lest  there  be  doubting  Thomases  among  them.  He 
prefaced  all  this  by  a  statement  that  should  settie  every 
doubt:  "All  authority  hath  been  given  unto  me  in  heaven 
and  on  earth."  T^otice  the  significance  of  that  statement 
in  connection  with  this  commission  for  world-conversion. 
All  authority  "  in  heaven  "  is  His.  What  more  could  He 
have  than  that  as  far  as  heaven  is  concerned?  All  power 
"  on  earth "  is  His.  What  more  could  He  have  in  that 
line?  Christ  during  this  dispensation  has  all  power  both 
in  heaven  and  on  earth.  If  this  be  so,  and  it  is,  then 
there  will  never  be  a  time  when  He  will  have  more 
power  than  He  has  now  either  in  heaven  or  on  earth.  This 
present  dispensation  is  the  dispensation  of  Christ.  He 
has  all  power  both  in  heaven  and  on  earth  (or  this  dis- 
p^isation.  This  is  not  the  dispensation  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
as  some  say:  it  is  the  dispensation  of  Christ.  The  Holy 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  808.    8 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


300  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Julyt 

Spirit  never  testifies  of  Himself,  but  always  of  Christ.  This 
is  our  Lord's  own  testimony  as  to  the  mission  of  the  Holy 
Spirit:  "But  when  the  Comforter  is  come,  whom  I  will 
send  unto  you  from  the  Father,  even  the  Spirit  of  tmtb, 
which  proceedeth  from  the  Father,  he  shall  bear  witness 
of  me"  {John  xv.  26).  The  Holy  Spirit  does  not  come  of 
Himself:  He  is  sent  by  Christ;  He  is  the  Lord's  agent. 

Paul,  in  all  his  teaching  concerning  the  power  of  Christ, 
referred  to  his  power  as  the  power  of  the  indwelling  Christ. 
"  My  little  children,  of  whom  I  am  again  in  travail  until 
Christ  be  formed  in  you"  (Gal.  iv.  19).  That  is  strong 
language;  it  is  the  figure  of  the  unborn  babe.  As  the  babe 
is  formed  in  the  mother,  and  is  vitally  a  part  of  herself;  so 
Christ  is  to  be  formed  in  us,  a  very  part  of  ourselves.  Do 
we  catch  the  fullness  of  this  promise  of  Christ's  presence 
with  His  church  as  she  goes  forth  on  her  commission?  "  Lo, 
I  am  with  you."  Not  as  one  beside  us,  but  as  an  indwelling 
personality  is  Christ  Jesns  to  be  with  His  people  in  their 
worli.  He  is  an  indwelling,  vitalizing,  and  quickening 
power  within  us,  a  very  living  power.  That  is  what  He 
promises  to  the  Church.  And  the  promise  here  corre- 
sponds to  the  command.  The  Lord  would  surely  not  en- 
courage His  followers  to  fulfill  His  command  to  disciple 
all  nations,  by  promising  to  be  continuously  ("all  the 
days"),  with  them  while  time  lasts  ("even  note  the  enc! 
of  the  world  "),  unless  the  process  of  discipling  the  nations 
here  commanded  was  itself  to  continue  unbrokenly  to  this 
end;  and  unless  He  expected  its  accomplishment. 

Premillenarians  try  to  belittle  the  meaning  of  this  text. 
First,  they  say :  To  make  disciples  of  all  nations  does  not 
mean  that  we  are  to  make  Christians  of  them :  that  it 
means  simply  to  preach  the  gospel  everywhere  so  as  to 
give  all  the  people  a  chance  to  be  saved.  The  Rev.  Dr.  B. 
M.  Russell,  of  the  Moody  Bible  Institute,  says:  "The 
church  is  not  charged  with  the  responsibility  for  convert- 
ing the  world,  but  must  evangelize  the  world  "  (The  King- 
dom View  of  the  KDospel,  p.  10).  They  simply  mean  that  the 
gospel  is  to  be  preached  everywhere,  so  that  if  the  people 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Post-millenariana  301 

want  to  heap  it  they  can.  When  a  premUlaiariaii  talks 
about  "evangelizing  the  world,"  he  does  not  mean  the 
Christianizing  of  it  Is  this  the  full  meaning  of  our  Lord'B 
great  commission?  He  did  not  say  "evangelize"  them, 
but  "  disciple  "  them,  and  then  baptize  them,  and  then  in- 
struct them.  Does  not  that  indicate  a  continuous  and  per- 
sistent work  for  all  the  nations  till  the  work  is  reaUy  done, 
until  the  people  are  Christianized?  Though  the  divine 
commands  are  not  always  the  measure  of  human  success, 
there  are  here  strong  indications  that  the  stupendous  work 
of  discipling  the  world  enjoined  by  Christ  on  His  disciples 
was  intended  by  Him  to  be  accomplished. 

(a)  Christ  did  not  commission  His  church  to  preach 
the  gospel  as  a  witness  sitnply;  but  to  make  disciples  of 
the  people,  and  to  baptize  them  into  the  membership  of  the 
church,  (b)  In  issuing  this  commission  Christ  gave  no 
intimation  that  the  effort  to  convert  the  world  would  be 
failure.  The  commission  was  to  disciple  the  world,  (c)  In 
order  to  inspire  confidence  He  pointed  out  the  source  of 
their  success,  —  His  presence  and  His  all-power.  The 
apostles  would  surely  understand  this  as  a  commission  to 
do  things:  they  were  to  make  disciples;  they  were  to  bap- 
tize; they  were  to  Instruct.  They  were  to  get  results  in 
the  way  of  conversions  and  instructed  Christians.  This  is  a 
tremendously  big  commission.  But  our  premillennial  breth- 
ren would  take  the  heart  out  of  it  by  saying  that  it  does 
not  mean  so  much  as  this;  that  it  does  not  mean  results: 
that  it  means  only  that  we  are  to  preach  the  gospel  every- 
where, that  aU  may  have  a  chance  to  hear  and  be  saved. 
They  make  very  little  of  this  great  commission.  They  al- 
most never  quote  it.  They  prefer  to  take  that  other  text 
which  says:  "  This  gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  preached 
in  the  whole  world  for  a  testimony  unto  all  the  nations; 
and  then  shall  the  end  come"  (Matt.  ixiv.  14).  They  as- 
sume that  the  testimony  will  be  imavailing.  They  inter- 
pret this  text  as  if  nothing  more  could  be  asked  of  us  but 
to  bear  an  unavailing  testimony  to  Christ  before  all  na- 
tions.   Instead  of  interpreting  this  text  by  that  much  more 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


302  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

specific  and  clearly  meaDlngful  text,  the  Lord's  great  com- 
mission, they  read  out  of  the  Lord's  commission  all  that 
specific  information  and  obligation  that  is  not  in  this  more 
meager  and  less  meaningfnl  text.  They  interpret  the 
longer,  fuller,  and  more  specific  text  by  the  shorter  and 
less  specific  text,  instead  of  interpreting  the  shorter  and 
less  clear  text  by  the  longer,  fuller,  and  more  specific  text 
on  tbe  same  subject.  Is  that  a  correct  principle  of  inter- 
pretation? In  any  other  instance  they  themselves  would 
admit  that  it  is  not.  It  seems  that  they  adopt  it  here  be- 
cause this  is  the  only  way  of  getting  rid  of  this  great  com- 
mission of  our  Lord,  this  text  which  bo  interferes  witb 
their  theory. 

A  few  of  them,  in  order  to  get  rid  of  the  teaching  of  this 
troublesome  text,  would  have  us  believe  that  what  Christ 
meant  was  not  that  all  the  people  were  to  be  converted, 
but  that  a  few  of  them  were  to  be  called  out  from  aU  na- 
tions. In  an  address  delivered  before  a  Young  People's 
Presbyterial  Convention,  the  man  who  led  in  the  calling 
of  the  1914  Premillennial  Conference  in  Chicago  said; 
"  Sometimes  it  is  said  that  to  evangelize  the  world  means 
to  Christianize  the  world.  But  that  is  not  the  teaching 
of  the  Bible.  That  text,  '  Go  ye  and  make  disciples  of  all 
nations,'  does  not  mean  to  Christianize  all  people.  It  means 
to  make  disciples  from  among  all  nations."  He  translated 
as  if  the  Greek  preposition  eft  were  there;  when,  as  a  mat- 
ter of  fact,  it  was  not.  "All  nations  "  is  the  direct  object 
of  the  verb;  go,  disciple  all  nations. 

Then,  still  further  in  their  attempt  to  get  rid  of  this 
troublesome  text,  they  insist  that  "  to  the  end  of  the 
world"  does  not  mean  that;  but  that  it  means  "to  the 
end  of  the  age."  Of  this  they  never  convince  any  but  them- 
selves. Both  the  American  Revised  Bible  and  the  English 
Revised  Bible  translate  it  "  to  the  end  of  the  world."  Then, 
too,  our  Lord's  own  use  of  the  phrase  elsewhere,  makes 
this  translation  certain.  He  employs  the  phrase  in  two 
other  places,  —  in  connection  with  the  parable  of  the  tares, 
and  of  the  drawnet: — 


DiqifzeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Poat-millenarians  303 

"  And  the  enemy  that  sowed  them  is  the  devil :  and  the 
harvest  is  the  end  of  the  world ;  and  the  reapers  are  angels. 
As  therefore  the  tares  are  gathered  up  and  burned  with 
fire;  bo  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  the  world.  The  Son  of 
man  shall  send  forth  his  angels,  and  they  shall  gather  out 
of  his  kingdom  all  things  that  cause  stumbling,  and  th^n 
that  do  iniquity,  and  shall  cast  them  into  the  furnace  of 
fire :  there  shall  be  the  weeping  and  the  gnashing  of  teeth. 
Then  shall  the  righteous  shine  forth  as  the  sun  in  the  king- 
dom of  their  Father"  (Matt.  xUi.  39-43). 

"The  harvest  is  the  end  of  the  world";  and  Jesus  ex- 
plains this  to  mean  that,  as  the  tares  are  gathered  up  and 
burned  with  fire;  so  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  the  world;  the 
wicked  shall  be  gathered  up  and  cast  into  the  fire.  This 
cannot  be  the  premiU^iarians'  "  end  of  the  age  " ;  because 
the  wicked,  according  to  their  own  theory,  are  not  gath- 
ered out  and  cast  into  the  abyss  till  more  than  a  thousand 
years  after  the  end  of  their  "  age."  This  casting  out  of  the 
wicked  does  not  come  until  the  end  of  the  world,  even  ac- 
cording to  their  theory.  The  phrase  here  "  the  end  of  the 
world  "  is  the  very  same  as  is  used  in  Christ's  great  com- 
mission. He  uses  the  same  phrase  in  the  parable  of  the 
drawnet : — 

"Again,  the  kingdom  of  heaven  is  like  unto  a  net,  that 
was  cast  into  the  sea,  and  gathered  of  every  kind :  which, 
when  it  was  filled,  they  drew  up  on  the  beach;  and  they 
sat  down,  and  gathered  the  good  into  vessels,  but  the  bad 
they  cast  away.  So  shall  it  be  in  the  end  of  the  world: 
the  angels  shall  come  forth,  and  sever  the  wicked  from 
among  the  righteous,  and  shall  cast  them  into  the  furnace 
of  fire:  there  shall  be  the  weeping  and  the  gnashing  of 
teeth"  (Matt.  xiii.  47-50). 

The  phrase  is  used  again  by  the  disciples  of  our  Lord 
when  they  inquired  of  Him :  "  What  shall  be  the  sign  of 
thy  coming,  and  of  the  end  of  the  world?  "  (Matt.  xxiv.  3.) 
Here  the  second  coming  of  our  Lord  and  the  end  of  the 
world  are  treated  as  a  single  event.  Even  Alford,  one  of 
their  own  writers,  explains  "  the  end  of  the  world "  to 
mean  "  the  completion  of  the  state  of  time  "  after  which 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


304  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jvlj, 

"  time  shall  be  do  more."  80  long  as  time  eadures,  so  long 
this  commisBion  of  our  Lord  to  the  Church  to  disciple  all 
nations  by  baptism  and  instruction  continnes  in  force. 

PremlUenarians  and  postmlUenarians  diETer  most  rad- 
ically as  to  the  power  of  the  gospel  and  the  purpose  of  Ood 
in  this  dispensation.  The  one  believes  the  gospel  to  be  a 
failure  as  far  as  the  ChriBtianizing  of  the  world  is  con- 
cerned. The  other  believes  that  the  gospel  is  God's  ap- 
pointed means  for  converting  the  world  and  for  the  gen- 
eral uplift  of  society.  The  one  believes  that  the  Church 
and  the  world  are  growing  worse  and  worse  under  the 
preaching  of  the  gospel.  The  other  believes  that  the  gospel 
is  the  power  of  Ood,  and  that  the  world  is  being  gradually 
bnt  effectively  saved  by  the  preaching  and  the  uplifting 
influence  of  the  gospel,  and  that  eventually,  substantially 
the  whole  world  will  be  brought  to  bow  at  the  foot  of  the 
Cross. 

TOHRIQN   MISSIONS 

As  a  result  of  these  different  conceptions  of  the  power 
of  the  gospel  and  the  purpose  of  Ood  in  this  dispensation, 
premilleDarians  and  postmillenarians  have  before  them 
different  objects  in  foreign  missions. 

Premillenarians  and  postmillenarians  both  believe  in 
foreign  missions ;  but  they  believe  in  foreign  missions  from 
different  standpoints.  Pr^nillenarians  do  not  believe  that 
any  lai^  nnmber  of  the  heathen  will  be  converted  by 
the  missionary  efforts.  From  their  viewpoint  the  world 
and  the  Church  are  growing  worse  and  worse,  and  will 
continue  to  grow  worse  until  Christ  comes  to  Jerusalem 
and  sets  things  right.  With  such  a  conception  of  the  course 
of  things  they  cannot  hold  that  the  heathen  will  in  any 
lat^  numbers  be  saved  by  the  efforts  of  the  missionaries. 
Why  then  do  they  believe  in  sending  missionaries?  for  they 
are  active  in  missionary  zeal.  They  seize  on  the  word 
"  testimony  "  in  the  passage,  "And  this  gospel  of  the  king- 
dom shall  be  preached  in  the  whole  world  for  a  testimony 
onto  all  the  nations,  and  then  shall  the  end  come."    They 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Poat-millenariant  305 

claim  that  the  gospel  is  to  be  preached  as  a  "  witness  "  to 
the  uatiOHB,  and  that  this  must  be  done  before  Christ  can 
come  again.  So  in  order  to  hasten  the  coming  of  our  Lord 
they  believe  in  sending  missionaries  to  all  the  people.  They 
do  not  expect  that  the  heathen  in  any  large  numbers  vill 
respond;  but  all  must  have  a  chance  to  hear  the  gospel; 
so  that,  if  they  do  not  accept  Christ,  the  fault  will  be  their 
own. 

Premillenarians  in  their  preaching  and  writings  never 
lay  stress  on  the  great  gospel  commission,  "  Go  ye  and 
make  disciples  of  all  the  nations."  They  put  the  emphasis 
on  preaching  the  gospel  as  a  "  testimony,"  and  they  use 
the  word  as  a  testimony  against,  and  not  a  testimony  for; 
they  assume  that  it  will  be  an  unavailing  testimony.  In 
their  view  the  gospel  is  to  be  preached  as  a  testimony  prac- 
tically for  condemnation;  whereas  Christ,  in  His  great 
commission,  put  the  emphasis  on  preaching  the  gospel  for 
discipleship.  "  Disciple  all  the  nations "  is  Christ's  put- 
ting of  it. 

Does  any  one  think  we  are  not  fair  ou  this  point?  Here 
is  a  quotatioQ  from  the  ofBcial  reeolntions  adopted  by  the 
International  Prophetic  Conference  of  PremiUenariaos 
held  in  Chicago,  1886:— 

"  Besolution  4.  The  Scriptures  nowhere  teach  that  the 
whole  world  will  be  converted  to  God,  and  that  there  will 
be  a  reign  of  universal  righteousness  and  peace  before  the 
return  of  the  blessed  Lord,"  etc. 

"  Resolution  5.  The  duty  of  the  church  during  the  ab- 
sence of  the  bridegroom  is  to  watch  and  pray,  to  work  and 
wait,  to  go  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  gospel  to 
every  creature,  and  thus  to  hasten  the  coming  of  God." 

These  same  resolutions  were  adopted  by  the  Great  Inter- 
national Prophetic  Conference  of  Premillenarians  held  in 
New  York  City  eight  years  earlier.  The  reader  will  note 
that  these  Conferences,  composed  as  they  were  of  the  lead- 
ing premillenarians  of  America,  and  some  even  from  En- 
rope,  declare,  not  that  the  purpose  of  sending  missionaries 
is  the  conversion  of  the  heathen,  but  "  to  hasten  the  com- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


306  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jul;, 

ing  of  Ood."  That  ia  the  offlcial  expression  of  their  pur- 
pose in  sending  missionaries  —  "  to  hasten  the  coming  of 
God."    This,  too,  ia  just  what  they  all  hold  to-day. 

The  Bev.  Dr.  L.  W.  Manhall  says :  But  some  inquire,  do 
not  the  Scriptures  teach  that  the  world  will  be  converted  ? 
I  answer,  not  by  a  single  word.  .  .  .  The  Word  of  God  does 
not  teach  that  the  world  will  be  converted.  It  teaches  most 
emphatically  that  it  will  not  be.  .  .  .  The  Word  nowhere  by 
a  single  sentence,  intimates  that  the  world  is  to  be  con- 
verted "  (The  Coming  One,  p.  25). 

The  Rev.  B.  Y.  Miller  says:  "Israel  is  now  like  a  local 
train,  placed  on  a  side  track,  in  order  to  let  the  church,  a 
through  train,  pass  by  taking  on  only  a  few  passengers, 
then  Israel  will  be  switched  back  on  the  main  line,  stop- 
ping everywhere  and  taking  np  the  world"  (p.  25).  His 
idea  plainly  is  that  the  Ghnrch  to-day  is  not  in  the  busi- 
ness of  saving  the  world,  but  is  taking  on  only  a  few  pas- 
sengers j  while  in  the  millennium,  after  Israel  has  returned 
to  Palestine  and  has  been  pat  in  charge  under  the  direct 
leadership  of  Christ,  then  the  Church  will  take  np  the  seri- 
ous work  of  saving  the  world. 

Dr.  Morgan  uses  these  words  of  the  Church's  work: 
"  The  Son  of  man  shall  send  forth  His  angels,  and  they 
shall  gather  out  of  His  kingdom  all  that  cause  stumbling, 
everything  that  offends.  This  is  my  hope  to-day.  Oh,  my 
hope  is  not  in  any  missionary  society  in  existence,  nor  in 
any  evangelistic  society  in  existence.  I  pray  that  they  may 
do  their  duty,  and  preach  the  gospel,  and  hasten  the  com- 
ing day;  but  my  hope  is  in  flaming  seraphs;  my  heart 
cries  out  for  their  coming."  Dr.  Uorgan  wants  the  gos- 
pel preached  to  the  ends  of  the  earth,  not  with  any  expec- 
tation that  many  will  be  converted ;  he  does  not  think  this 
to  be  the  mission  of  the  Church;  the  saving  of  the  world 
will  not  come  about  till  the  flaming  seraphs  come  to  gather 
the  people  in. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  B.  A.  Torrey,  dean  of  the  Bible  Institute 
of  Lob  Angeles,  California,  said  in  his  book  "  The  Betum 
of  the  Lord  Jesus"  (1914):    "The  purpose  of  preaching 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Poat-mUlenariana  307 

the  gospel  of  grace  in  this  diapensation  is  not  the  toinning 
of  the  whole  world  for  Christ  but  the  gathering  out  of  the 
world  a  people  for  Bis  name.  Man;  people  in  these  days 
raise  the  watch  cry,  'America  for  Christ,'  but  those  who 
know  their  Bibles  know  that  we  shall  not  see  'America  for 
Christ,'  nor  the  whole  world  '  for  Christ '  in  the  presoit 
dispensation.  The  Qospel  of  grace  has  not  failed  —  it  is 
accomplishing  just  what  Ood  intended  it  should  accom- 
plish, gathering  out  a  people  for  His  name,  the  church,  the 
bride  of  Christ"  (p.  120). 

It  la  worth  while  to  note  some  things  about  Dr.  Torrey's 
statement ; — 

1.  God  never  intended  that  the  preaching  of  the  gospel 
during  this  dispensation  should  convert  the  whole  world  nor 
any  large  part  of  it.  It  is  hard  to  understand  how  Dr.  Tor- 
rey  could  reconcile  that  statement  with  Christ's  great  com- 
mission, "  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all  the 
aations,  baptizing  them,"  and  "  teaching  them." 

2.  Dr.  Torrey  has  no  thought  of  the  conversion  of  the 
world  in  this  dispensation. 

3.  The  gospel  of  grace  is  accomplishing  just  what  Ood 
intended  it  should  accomplish  in  this  meager  ingathering 
to  which  they  hold.  According  to  such  a  conception,  one 
can  hardly  see  that  the  Chnrch  is  to  be  blamed  for  not 
getting  better  results  in  conversions;  for  God  never  in- 
tended the  Church  to  get  better  results;  God  never  intended 
that  the  Church  should  accomplish  more  than  she  is  ac- 
complishing in  the  way  of  ingathering. 

The  late  Dr.  A.  T.  Pierson,  who  died  in  1910  and  who, 
during  his  lifetime,  was  one  of  the  very  foremost  premil- 
lennialists  in  this  country  and  the  world,  at  the  Interna- 
tional Prophetic  Conference  in  Chicago,  gave  a  brilliant 
address  on  the  subject  "  Premillennial  Motives  for  Evangel- 
ism." He  gave  six  motives  which  should  move  premille- 
narians  to  evangelism.  But  the  making  disciples  of  the 
heathen  was  not  given  as  one  of  them,  —  indeed,  he  never 
mentioned  the  conversion  of  the  heathen;  and  Christ's 
great  commission,  "  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  make  disciples 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


308  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

of  all  the  nations,"  was  never  quoted,  or  even  referred  to, 
a^  playing  any  part  among  their  missionary  motives.  And 
yet  the  snbject  of  that  paper  was  "  PremUlennial  Motives 
for  Evaogelisni."  Neither  is  Dr.  PiersoD  alone  in  his  si- 
lence on  that  subject.  I  have  read  every  address  given  in 
the  Intematiooal  Prophetic  Conferences  of  Premillenar- 
ians  held  in  New  York,  in  Chicago,  in  Allegheny,  and  in 
Chicago  in  1914.  I  have  read  scores  of  books  and  pam- 
phlets written  by  premillenarians,  and  in  not  a  single  one 
of  them  is  there  any  stress  laid  on  that  great  commission  of 
onr  Jjord.  If  it  is  quoted  at  all,  it  is  tucked  away  in  a  cor- 
ner and  hurried  away  from.  In  aU  the  addresses  of  at 
least  three  of  these  great  conveotions  it  was  not  so  much 
as  even  quoted.  When  I  began  reading  Dr.  Pierson's  ad- 
dress on  the  subject  "  Premillennial  Motives  for  Evangel- 
ism," I  said  to  myself,  Surely  I  will  find  here  some  refer- 
ence to  my  Lord's  great  commission ;  but  there  was  not 
a  word. 

Why  do  they  ignore  this  great  commission  ?  Is  it  because 
it  so  completely  cuts  across  their  theory  for  the  kingdom? 
Dr.  Morgan,  in  his  book  "  God's  Method  with  Man,"  after 
setting  forth  the  course  of  events  in  this  dispensation  and 
how  thoroughly  Satan  prevails,  and  the  fewness  of  those 
being  saved,  according  to  premillenarian  conceptions,  adds: 
"  Some  will  say  then  Qod  is  beaten,  inasmuch  as  compar- 
atively few  are  being  gathered  into  the  church."  "  That," 
he  says,  "  is  a  very  short-sighted  view.  God  has  never  for 
a  moment  been  defeated  in  the  course  of  human  history, 
Ev^it  has  followed  event  in  Qod's  progressive  work  in  re- 
demption and  regeneration,  alt  the  details  of  which  have 
been  necessary." 

Note  carefully  Dr.  Morgan's  meaning.  Though  few  are 
being  saved,  and  though  Satan  thoroughly  prevails,  yet 
God  is  not  beaten,  for  "  this  is  God's  plan."  This  he  and 
others  say  in  the  face  of  Christ's  commission,  "  Go  ye, 
therefore,  and  make  disciples  of  all  the  nations." 

Then  I  ask  you  to  note  again  that  a  premillenarian  never 
talks  about  Christianizing  the  world  in  this  generation,  or 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Poat-millenariaTia  309 

in  this  diBpeneatlon,  or  even  about  saving  the  world  at  all. 
He  never  talks  atraut  Christianizing  the  world  —  how  could 
he?  —  for  he  does  not  believe  such  to  be  God's  plan.  God'e 
plan  for  the  kingdom  is  to  gather  out  a  few,  and  to  preach 
the  gospel  as  a  witness,  and  then  to  have  the  real  woi^  of 
saving  the  world  done  after  Christ  sets  up  His  throne  at 
Jemsalem.  He  talks  about  "evangelizing  the  world  in  this 
generation."  But  ask  bim  what  he  means  by  "  evangeliz- 
ing." He  does  not  mean  Christianizing  it;  he  does  not 
mean  saving  it;  he  means  simply  that  the  Church  shall 
send  missionaries  to  all  parts  of  the  world,  so  that  people 
everywhere  may  have  a  mere  chance  to  hear  the  gospel.  He 
does  not  expect  many  of  them  to  respond;  but  the  gospel 
will  have  been  preached  as  a  "  testimony,"  and  the  fault 
will  be  theirs.    It  is  submitted  that  this  is  a  low  ideal. 

The  Bev.  Dr.  Minteer,  a  missionary  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  to  China,  told  the  writer  this  incident.  At  the  an- 
nual meeting  of  the  missionaries  in  China  one  of  the  min- 
isterial members,  who  was  a  strong  premillenDialist,  in  re- 
lating the  story  of  his  work,  told  about  a  trip  he  made 
through  a  province  in  which,  up  to  that  time,  no  mission- 
ary work  had  been  done.  He  told  in  a  most  enthusiastic 
way  of  how  he  had  gone  to  a  town  and  preached  in  the 
forenoon,  then  to  another  town  and  preached  in  the  after- 
noon, and  to  another  in  the  evening,  and  how  he  had  kept 
this  itinerant  work  up  for  a  month,  until  he  had  preached 
in  a  lai^  nnmber  of  towns.  He  was  most  enthusiastic 
over  the  work.  One  of  his  fellow  workers  interrupted  him 
and  asked  how  many  converts  he  had  made.  "  Oh,"  he  an- 
swered, "  I  do  not  know  that  I  made  any  converts,  but  I 
preached  the  gospel  sufficiently  to  damn  those  people." 

That  premillennialist  was  surely  lacking  in  delicacy  in 
his  putting  of  the  case;  but,  as  a  matter  of  fact,  it  is  not 
a  bad  illustration  of  what  is  meant  by  a  premillennialist 
when  he  talks  about  "  evangelizing  the  world  in  this  gen- 
eration." 

Dr.  Simpson  says :  "  We  are  to  preach  the  gospel  among 
all  nations,  not  with  the  expectation  that  they  will  be 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


310  B^Uotheoa  Sacra  [July* 

converted,  but  as  a  witness  and  as  an  opportunity  for 
salvation  for  every  sinful  man."  That  is  not  as  blont  as 
the  China  missiouary  put  it,  but  it  means  practically  the 
same  thing.  How  can  an;  one  believe  that  tbis  is  what 
Jesus  meant  when  He  gave  His  great  commission? 

Yes:  premill^iarians  are  active  in  foreign  missionary 
work.  Many  of  them  are  our  foremost  leaders  in  mission- 
ary activity;  and  many  of  our  foreign  missionaries  are 
themselves  premillenarian  in  their  beliefs.  But  premiUe- 
narians  believe  in  sending  missionaries,  so  that  the  second 
coming  of  Christ  may  be  hastened.  Incidentally,  and  with 
great  heart-yearning,  they  hope  that  many  will  be  con- 
verted. And  their  practice,  too,  is  better  than  their  the- 
ory; else  they  would  keep  moving  on  from  place  to  place 
so  as  to  reach  as  many  as  possible,  instead  of  tarrying  to 
.instruct  and  baptize.  But  the  primary  purpose  in  their 
sending  missionaries  is  that  they  may  fulfill  the  conditions 
for  the  second  coming  of  the  Lord  to  reign  at  Jerusalem. 
So  they  have  declared  in  two  of  their  great  premillennial 
conferences,  and  so  have  their  writers  declared. 

POSTMILUINAKIANS  AND   MISSIONS 

Postmillenarians  send  missionaries  with  the  primary 
purpose  of  converting  the  heathen.  They  take  as  their 
marching  orders,  "  Qo  ye,  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of 
all  the  nations."  Their  program  is  Christ's  program, — 
"  make  disciples."  It  has  in  it  the  ring  of  sincerity,  and 
it  has  in  it  the  ring  of  truth.  "All  authority  is  given  unto 
me  in  heaven  and  on  earth,"  —  He  can  never  have  more 
power  than  this,  "  Go  ye,  therefore,  and  make  disciples  of 
an  the  nations,  baptizing  them  .  .  .  and  teaching  them,"  — ■ 
there  can  be  no  stronger  command  than  that.  It  means 
Christianizing,  not  evangelizing,  and  it  takes  in  the  world. 
In  carrying  out  this  command,  He  says:  "And  lo,  I  am 
with  you  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world,"  —  there 
could  be  no  more  sweeping  promise  as  to  His  presence  and 
help.  It  is  for  always,  and  it  is  to  the  end  of  the  world. 
Why  should  any  one  minimize  such  a  glorious  and  blessed 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Pre-  and  Po8t-mAllenariana  311 

promise?  That  great  promiee,  too,  is  just  in  harmonj  vitli 
BIh  every  ntterance  an  tn  the  future  of  Hifi  kingdom,  and 
vitlk  HiB  whole  bearing  on  the  aubject.  Christ .  gave  no 
word  as  to  how  long  it  would  take  to  disciple  the  world; 
and  He  certainly  gave  no  intimation  that  the  Church 
would  have  to  give  up  this  plan.  And  with  Christ  back 
of  His  church  in  this  program,  and  in  the  use  of  His  "  all 
authority  "  she  will  in  the  end  not  fail. 

rostmillenariaQs  send  missionariea  to  the  heathen,  in 
answer  to  Christ's  command  and  promise  of  help,  for  the 
purpose  of  making  disciples  of  them ;  and,  while  the  work 
may  be  slow,  they  folly  believe  that  eventually  the  work 
win  be  done,  and  substantially  the  whole  world  will  be 
converted,  and  will  acknowledge  Christ  as  universal  Lord. 

Premillenarians  send  the  gospel  to  the  heathen  prima- 
rily to  hasten  the  coming  of  Christ,  and  incidentally  to 
save  a  few. 

I  submit  that  there  is  a  tremendous  difference  betweoi 
the  two  motives.  Which  is  the  more  in  harmony  with 
Christ's  great  commission,  and  with  Christ's  great  loving 
desire  to  have  all  saved  ?  * 

"The  Neale  Publishing  Company.  440  Fourth  Avenue^  New  York 
City,  hat  Just  brought  out  a  volume  of  300  pages  by  I>r.  HcClena- 
han,  enUtled  "  Tbe  Postmlllennial  View  of  tbe  Second  Coming  of 
Christ."  Tbls  book  Is  a  clear  and  comprehensive  study  of  the  Bib- 
lical arguments  lor  and  against  premlllennlallsm.  Its  price  Is 
ll.GO. — ^Bditob. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE  MISSION  OP  THE  CHURCH 

PEOFESSOB   NBWTON    WHAT 
UPIAND,   INDIANA 

No  question  should  appeal  more  directly  to  the  heart 
of  the  true  believer  than  this.  While  the  cause  claims  bis 
love  and  zeal,  the  end  sought  muat  react  on  his  spiritual 
nature,  and  greatly  affect  the  volitional  result  If  one's 
ideal  and  aim  determine  the  character  of  his  activity  in 
other  affairs,  they  certainly  do  so  in  the  work  of  the 
Church.  Neither  the  -Church  nor  the  individual  vill  show 
the  best  type  of  service  under  a  mistaken  view  of  the  Di- 
vine calling.  The  goal  will  affect  all  the  incentives  to 
conduct. 

There  is  but  one  method  of  ascertaining  this  goal,  BO 
far  as  the  Church  Is  concerned,  and  placing  in  clear  light 
her  supreme  obligation;  and  that  is,  searching  the  Scrip- 
tures with  a  spirit  divested  of  every  thought  and  desire, 
bnt  to  know  the  thought  and  desire  of  God,  and  to  hear 
His  voice  speaking  therein,  causing  them  to  blend  in  har- 
monions  testimony  to  the  truth.  Such  a  method  will  es- 
tablish, I  think,  certain  negative  propositions  and  make 
clear  a  positive  one. 

The  first  proposition  is,  that  the  Mission  of  the  Church 
w  not  the  Conversion  of  the  World.  This  may  seem  strange 
to  those  who  have  been  accustomed  to  regard  the  present 
dispensation  as  the  final  one,  and  to  assert  that  existing 
agencies  have  been  ordained  to  bring  in  the  Millennium. 
"Is  not  this  the  dispensation  of  the  Holy  Spirit?"  they 
ask,  "and  was  He  not  given  to  convert  the  world?" 

The  idea  of  universal  salvation  implied  by  such  a  ques- 
tion not  only  contradicts  the  teaching  of  Scripture,  but 
sets  aside  the  free  moral  agency  of  man,  whose  power  to 
resist  the  truth  is  as  evident  as  that  of  the  Holy  Spirit  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


The  Mission  of  the  Church  313 

renew  those  who  yield  to  His  operations.  We  aatarally 
Buppoee  that  out  Lord  would  plainly  Btate  the  mission  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  in  the  messages  He  gave  the  disciples  con- 
ceming  Him.  The  supposition  is  fact  Understanding  by 
the  world  its  inhabitants,  who  are  without  God  and  with- 
out hope,  we  are  taught  that  the  mission  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
with  respect  to  the  world  is  to  convict  it  "  of  sin,  and  of 
righteousness,  and  of  judgment"  (John  ivi.  8-11).  As  to 
the  penitent  and  believing.  He  has  another  office  to  per- 
form,—  to  work  in  them  that  spiritual  change  which  con- 
stitutes them  the  children  of  God,  and  then  to  comfort 
them,  sanctify  them,  and  endue  them  for  the  service  of 
ChrUt  (John  i.  10-13;  iii.  »-6;  xiv.  16-17;  xvi.  13-15;  Acts 
i.  8;  Matt.  iii.  11).  So,  the  Saviour's  prayer  (John  xvii.) 
is  that  His  disciples,  kept  from  the  evil  one,  and  sent  into 
the  world,  may  be  sanctified,  and  unified,  "  that  the  world 
may  believe  that  thou  hast  sent  me  "  —  not  that  the  world 
may  be  converted.  The  object  of  this  unification,  which 
is  the  work  of  the  Spirit  {Eph.  iv.  3),  is  to  present  to  the 
world  such  ocular  proof  of  the  power  of  the  Gospel  to 
transform  selfish  human  hearts,  that  people  may  believe 
it  is  supernatural  and  divine.  This  is  not  saving  faith,  but 
a  preparation  for  it.  This  makes  the  issue  with  the  world. 
Whether  any  who  t>elong  to  the  world  wiil  meet  the  issue 
and  accept  the  Saviour  thus  revealed,  is  another  matter. 

Of  the  same  import  is  the  sermon  of  Peter  on  the  Day 
of  Pentecost,  in  which  the  prophecy  of  Joel  (then  par- 
tially fulfilled)  is  referred  to  that  inaugural  day  of  our 
dispensation.  The  purpose  of  the  Spirit's  descent,  and  of 
the  ministration  of  the  Gospel,  is  explicitly  stated  to  be 
that  "  whosoever  shall  call  on  the  name  of  the  Lord  shall 
be  saved." 

Under  the  illumination  of  the  Holy  Spirit  the  apostles 
understood,  as  never  before,  the  Divine  plan  for  the  age 
so  auspiciously  l>^un.  In  one  of  His  last  interviews  with 
them  Jesus  had  "  opened  their  mind,  that  they  might  un- 
derstand the  scriptures,"  saying  to  them,  "  Thus  it  is  writ- 
ten, that  the  Christ  should  suffer,  and  rise  again  from  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


314  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Julyj 

dead  the  third  day;  and  that  repentance  and  remission  of 
Bins  shoold  be  preached  in  hia  name  onto  all  the  natione, 
beginning  from  Jernsalem.  Ye  are  witnesses  of  these 
things.  And  behold,  I  send  forth  the  promise  of  my  Fa- 
ther upon  yon ;  but  tarry  ye  in  the  city,  until  ye  be  clothed 
with  power  from  on  high"  (Luke  xxiv.  45-49). 

Here,  then,  were  the  Oonpel,  and  the  ag^icy  for  its 
proclamation  throughout  the  earth.  The  Holy  Spirit  was 
given  to  qualify  the  Church  to  brmg  Christ  to  the  world, 
and  not  to  hrmg  the  world  to  Christ.  The  world's  evangel- 
izatiou  is  not  its  conversion,  but  its  having  the  Gospel 
preached  to  it  with  the  Holy  Spirit  sent  down  from 
heaven,  that  "  whosoever  shall  call  upon  the  name  of  the 
Lord  shall  be  saved,"  or,  as  expressed  by  James,  "  to  take 
out  of  the  Gentiles  a  people  for  his  name,"  with  the 
ultimate  view  of  a  dispensation  to  be  inaugurated  by  His 
personal  advent  for  the  destruction  of  Anti-Christ,  the 
overthrow  of  Gentile  dominion,  and  the  establislimeDt  of  a 
Kingdom  so  long  foretold,  prayed  for,  and  expected  (Acts 
IV.  14-18). 

The  language  of  the  great  Commission  cannot  be  tnmed 
into  disproof  of  this  proposition.  The  Commission  was  to 
"  make  disciples  of  all  the  nations,  baptizing  them  into  the 
name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost : 
teaching  them  to  observe  aU  things  whatsoever  I  com- 
manded you"  (Matt,  xiviii.  19-20).  That  this  command 
can  mean  90  more  than  making  disciples  in  all  nations,  is 
evident  from  the  fact  that  no  nation  as  a  whole  has  ever 
been  converted  since  the  Church  b^an  her  career,  and  this 
work  is  still  going  on  in  Dominally  Christian  lands,  though 
they  are  evangelized  in  the  Scriptural  s^ise  of  that  term. 
Only  those  who  become  disciples  among  the  nations  to 
which  the  Gospel  is  carried,  are  baptized,  and  instructed 
in  the  dntiee  of  discipleship. 

Moreover,  the  implication  that  all  men  in  these  nations 
are  intended  by  the  statement  contradicts  the  above  in- 
ference, in  which  the  residue  of  men,  and  all  the  Gentiles 
(the  nations)  are  said  to  seek  the  Lord,  after  Sis  return. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Mission  of  ffte  Church  315 

With  this  reference  agrees  Faul'a  argument  in  regard  to 
the  rejection  of  Israel  and  the  offer  of  Siilvation  unto  the 
Oeutiles  (nations)  during  the  present  dispensation,  and 
the  conversion  of  Israel,  and  the  fullness  of  life  to  the 
nations  at  the  coming  of  the  Delirerer  to  turn  away  nn- 
godliness  from  Jacob  (Bom.  zi.  11-29).  By  no  sort  of 
ezegetical  legerdemain  can  these  Scriptures  be  confined 
to  our  Lord's  first  coming.  They  are  inextricably  bound 
up  with  numerous  passages  which  forecast  a  more  won- 
derful era  at  His  second  coming. 

The  assurance  with  which  the  Commission  closes  inti- 
mates as  much :  "  I  am  with  you  all  the  days,  even  to  the 
end  of  the  age"  [Or.  and  margin,  Rev.  Ver.).  The  assur- 
ance is  touching  His  spiritual  presence  which  continues 
with  His  disciples  during  this  age  of  gathering  out  of  the 
nations  the  Church,  at  the  consummation  of  which  His 
visible  presence  will  signalize  the  beginning  of  another  age. 

So,  in  His  answer  to  the  question  concerning  the  sign 
of  His  coming,  and  of  the  end  of  the  age.  He  declares  that 
"  this  gospel  of  the  kingdom  shall  be  preached  in  the  whole 
world  for  a  testimony  nnto  all  the  nations;  and  then  shall 
the  end  come"  (Matt.  zxiv.  3-li  Or.  and  margin.  Rev. 
Ver.) ;  and  this  testimony  includes  the  making  of  disciples, 
teaching  His  commandments,  and  all  the  varied  ministries 
of  the  Gospel  until  He  come. 

The  second  proposition  to  be  considered  is,  that  the 
Mission  of  the  Church  is  not  the  establishment  of  a  king- 
dom by  the  Church. 

If  that  were  the  business  of  the  Church  the  Master 
would  have  said  so.  On  the  contrary,  when  inquiry  was 
made  about  the  kingdom,  he  informed  the  apostles  their 
work  was  something  very  different.  "  They  therefore,  when 
they  were  come  together,  asked  him,  saying,  Lord,  dost 
thou  at  this  time  restore  the  kingdom  to  Israel?  And  he 
said  nnto  them,  It  is  not  for  yon  to  know  times  or  seasons, 
which  the  Father  hath  set  within  hia  own  authority.  But 
ye  shall  receive  power,  when  the  Holy  Spirit  is  come  upon 
yon,  and  ye  shall  be  my  witnesses  both  in  Jerusalem,  and 
Vol  LXXVt.    No.  303.     4 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


316  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Jul;, 

in  all  Judeea  and  Samaria,  and  unto  the  ottermost  part 
of  the  earth  "  (Acts  i.  6-8) . 

Our  Lord  does  not  deny  that  the  hope  which  every  pious 
Jew  cherished  would  be  realized,  but  intimates  that  the 
Father  hath  set  the  time  (or  this  in  His  own  authority, 
while  He  directs  their  attention  to  a  special  mission  which 
came  first  in  the  Divine  program,  for  the  performance  of 
which  they  were  to  receive  the  power  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
coming  upon  them. 

A  little  later  one  of  the  apostles,  presiding  over  the 
Council  at  Jerusalem,  inspired  b;  the  Spirit,  explained 
the  prophecy  concerning  the  restoration  about  which  in- 
qniry  had  been  made,  and  gave  the  other  features  of  that 
program.  Note  well  his  announcement,  following  Peter's 
statement  concerning  his  call  to  open  the  door  of  evangel- 
ization to  the  Oentiles,  and  the  account  b;  Barnabas  and 
Paul  of  signs  and  wonders  God  had  wrought  among  the 
Gentiles  by  them. 

"And  after  they  had  held  their  peace,  James  answered, 
sayiDg,  Brethren,  hearken  unto  me.  Symeon  hath  re- 
hearsed how  first  God  did  visit  the  Gentiles,  to  take  out 
of  them  a  people  for  his  name.  And  to  this  agree  the 
words  of  the  prophets;  as  it  is  written,  After  these  things 
I  will  return,  and  I  will  build  again  the  tabernacle  of 
David,  which  is  fallen,  and  I  will  build  again  the  ruins 
thereof,  and  I  will  set  it  up.  That  the  residue  of  men  may 
seek  after  the  Lord,  and  all  the  Gentiles  upon  whom  my 
name  is  called,  saith  the  IjOrd,  who  maketh  these  things 
known  from  the  beginning  of  the  world"  (Acts  iv.  13-18). 

Here  are  three  distinct  things  covering  the  present  age 
and  the  age  to  come: — 

1.  The  evangelization  of  the  world,  and  the  formation 
of  the  Church,  "  one  new  man,"  Jew  and  Gentile. 

2.  The  restoration  of  the  Jewish  nationality  at  the 
Lord's  personal  return  (compare  Matt,  xxiii.  38-39)  and 
the  setting  up  of  the  throne  of  His  father  David,  which 
He  is  to  occupy  with  the  Church,  then  glorified  (compare 
Luke  i.  31-33;  Matt.  xix.  28;  Luke  ixii.  29-30;  Hev.  iii. 
21;  Zech.  xii.  9-10;  xiv.  1-9). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Mission  of  the  Church  317 

It  is  not  possible  to  read  James'  quotation  from  the 
Prophet  Amos  without  connecting  it  with  the  Lord's  final 
utterance  of  doom  to  the  Jewish  nation:  "Behold,  your 
house  is  left  unto  you  desolate.  For  I  say  unto  you,  He 
shall  not  see  me  henceforth,  till  ye  shall  say,  Blessed  is 
he  that  cometh  in  the  name  of  the  Lord."  Surely  the  "  tab- 
ernacle of  David,"  vhich  is  to  be  rebuilt  "  after  his  return," 
is  none  other  than  the  house  left  unto  them  desolate  dur- 
ing His  absence.  And  this  bouse  is  still  desolate;  it  was 
not  restored  at  Pentecost,  and  the  destruction  of  Jerusa- 
lem (A.n.  70)  was  the  completion  of  that  desolation,  which 
remains  to  this  day.  Its  restoration  will  take  place  after 
His  return,  when  the  nation  will  recognize  in  Him  their 
Messiah,  and  say,  "  Blessed  is  he  that  cometh  in  the  name 
of  the  Lord  " ! 

3.  National  as  well  as  individual  salration  throughout 
the  world  —  a  Divine  manifestation  to  the  nations,  com- 
parable only  to  "  life  from  the  dead,"  through  God's  bless- 
ing upon  Israel  (compare  Bom.  zl.  12-29).  Only  when 
"  the  fullness  of  the  Gentiles  be  come  in,"  and  Israel  is 
"  grafted  into  their  own  olive  tree,"  will  that  nation  "  blos- 
som and  bad  "  and  "  fill  the  face  of  the  world  with  fruit  " 
(lea.  xxvil.  6). 

To  jumble  into  one  these  three  parts  of  Ood's  plan  of  the 
ages,  and  make  them  synonymous  with  the  first  part,  is 
to  make  an  end  of  sound  sense  in  the  exegesis  of  Scripture. 
The  apostle's  expression,  "to  this  agree  the^words  of  the 
prophets,"  shows  that  He  who  inspired  their  prophecies 
had  arranged  for  the  Church  period  made  certain  by  Is- 
rael's unfaithfulness,  and  that  only  by  this  plan  can  the 
Scriptures  be  harmonized.  The  words  "  after  these  things 
I  will  return  "  are  the  Spirit's  interpretation  of  the  proph- 
et's expression,  "  in  that  day  " ;  meaning  the  day  when 
Israel's  long  dispersion  shaU  be  ended  by  Messiah's  com- 
ing, which  James  places  after  the  Church  dispensation, 
and  their  national  rehabilitation  shall  take  place  in  the 
land  out  of  which  "  they  shall  no  more  be  plucked  up,  .  .  . 
saith  the  Lord  thy  God"  (Amos  ix.  11-15). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


318  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

Thie,  as  before  stated,  was  and  is  the  hope  of  the  pious 
Jew.  It  was  voiced  in  the  prayer  of  the  penitent  robber 
on  the  cross,  who  was  probably  a  Jew,  acquainted  with  the 
beliefs  of  his  nation.  Convicted  of  sin  by  the  majesty  and 
grace  of  the  Saviour  in  that  hour  of  anguish  and  death,  he 
confesses  his  sins,  and  prays,  "  Jesus,  remember  me  when 
thou  comest  in  thy  kingdom."  The  penitent  looked  for- 
ward to  a  place  in  the  Messiah's  kingdom  at  His  coming 
in  ^ory,  after  a  long  interval  in  the  intermediate  state. 
Jesus  promised  him  immediate  blessedneBs,  which  of  course 
included  his  hope. 

This  coming  in  His  kingdom  was  precisely  what  the  dis- 
ciples understood  by  His  personal  coming  to  set  up  that 
kingdom.  They  never  made  the  mistake  of  supposing  the 
kingdom  predicted  by  their  prophets  and  made  the  object 
of  prayer  by  their  Master,  could  come  without  the  King 
Himself.  Least  of  all  did  they  identify  the  advent  of  the 
Holy  Spirit  and  institution  of  the  Church  with  that  com- 
ing. Their  writings,  long  after  the  Day  of  Pentecost,  teem 
with  references  to  a  kingdom  in  connection  with  the  lord's 
personal  advent  Paul  and  Barnabas  exhorted  their  con- 
verts to  continue  in  the  faith,  and  that  through  many 
tribulations  they  must  enter  into  the  kingdom  of  Ood 
(Acts  liv.  22),  These  converts  were  in  the  Church,  spirit- 
ually united  to  Christ,  but  they  were  not  in  the  kingdom 
for  which  the  apostles  were  told  to  look,  when  the  Divine 
Nobleman  would  return  from  the  "  far  country "  with  the 
Kingdom,  the' time  of  whose  inauguration  the  Father  has 
set  in  His  own  authority.  Meantime  they  are  to  "  occupy  " 
with  the  investment  He  has  made  in  them,  "  till  he  comes  " 
to  determine  their  rewards  in  that  Kingdom  (Luke  ziz. 
11-15). 

True,  believers  are  in  the  Kingdom  of  Ood's  Son  in  the 
sense  of  union  with  the  Son,  and  the  Kingdom,  as  to  its 
spirituality,  is  in  them  (Col.  i.  13;  Bom.  xiv.  17),  for 
thereby  are  they  fitted  for  participation  in  the  visible, 
concrete  form  it  assumes  at  His  coming;  and  this  fact  of 
participatioa  is  emphasized  in  the  New  Testament    The 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Mitaion  of  the  Church  319 

Church,  "  which  is  hie  body,"  will  reign  with  the  Head,  at 
the  appointed  time. 

Bnt  the  apiritnal  sovereignty  of  Jesus  in  the  Chnrch, 
during  this  dispensation  of  cross-bearing  and  tribulation, 
cannot  be  made  to  synchronize  with  what  was  set  before 
the  Church  as  her  hope.  The  realization  of  the  principles 
of  the  kingdom  in  the  heart  and  life  of  tme  believers  is  an 
illustration  in  miniature  of  the  literal  fact  as  prevailing 
on  earth  during  the  Millennium.  The  principles  are  the 
same ;  the  sphere  and  magnitude  of  their  application  make 
the  difference. 

There  can  be  no  kingdom,  literally  speaking,  until  the 
King  returns  to  imprison  Satan,  abolish  Qentile  misrule, 
and  set  up  a  real  theocracy  under  which  governments  as 
well  as  individuals  shall  reflect  the  will  of  God. 

That  return,  be  it  observed,  is  to  be  "in  the  glory  of 
his  Father,"  when  He  shall  reward  those  who  have  denied 
themselves,  taken  up  their  cross,  and  followed  Him  in  His 
rejection  by  the  world.  This  is  identified  with  EQs  coming 
in  His  Kingdom :  "  Verily  I  say  unto  you,  There  be  some 
of  them  that  stand  here,  which  shall  in  no  wise  taste  of 
death,  tUl  they  see  the  Son  of  man  coming  in  his  king- 
dom "  (Matt.  xvi.  28;  compare  ver.  24-27).  Mark  says, 
"  Till  they  see  the  kingdom  of  God  come  with  power." 
Luke  abbreviates,  "  Till  they  see  the  kingdom  of  God." 

This,  we  are  told,  was  a  spiritual  coming,  at  Pentecost. 
But  such  a  coming  is  witnessed  on  every  great  spiritual 
awakening,  and  this  was  to  be  a  peculiar  manifestation, 
seen  only  by  "  some  of  them  "  who  stood  then  before  Him. 
The  next  verse  shows  that  the  manifestation  was  personal, 
and  that  it  was  Peter  and  James  and  John  who  saw  it 
(Matt.  zvii.  1-6).  Peter  identifies  this  scene  on  the  Mount 
with  the  coming  spoken  of  (2  Pet.  i.  16-18) ;  sufficient 
accompaniments  are  mentioned  to  make  the  identification 
clear.  It  was  a  sample  of  the  manner  of  His  personal 
coming.  There  were  "  the  clond,"  "  the  glory,"  and  "  the 
"  power  "  and  "  majesty  "  of  His  appearing.  Surely  power 
was  evident  —  such  power  as  will  be  manifested  in  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


820  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

appeariDg  of  the  saints  in  Hia  likeness  at  their  resurrec- 
tion, whicti  is  "the  first  resurrection"  (Rev,  xx.  4-6). 
There  were  also  represented  at  that  scene  the  three  classes 
of  persons  that  vill  be  present  when  He  comes  at  the  end 
of  this  age:  the  saints  who  died,  as  Hoses;  the  saints  who 
will  be  changed  without  death,  as  Blijah;  and  those  on 
earth  who  will  be  "  sore  afraid," 

I  now  come  to  the  last  proposition,  which  is  that  the 
goal  of  the  Church  is  the  visible  manifestation  of  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ  with  His  saints  to  assume  the  temporal  sov- 
ereignty of  the  world,  to  actualize  on  earth,  in  glory  and 
pmcer,  the  principles  which  now  find  expression  only  in 
spiritual  believers.  Then  will  the  Kingdom  prevail  in  all 
lands  nationally  as  well  as  individually,  in  govemmeut 
and  society  as  well  as  in  the  hearts  of  saved  people.  Then 
will  be  fulfilled  the  sublime  predictions:  "All  the  earth 
shall  be  filled  with  the  glory  of  the  Lord  "  (Num.  xiv.  21), 
and  "The  earth  shall  be  filled  with  the  knowledge  of  the 
glory  of  the  Lord,  as  the  waters  cover  the  sea"  (Hab.  ii. 
14).  "Then  nation  shall  not  lift  up  sword  against  nation, 
neither  shaU  they  learn  war  any  more."  It  is  the  thou- 
sand years  of  universal  righteonsness  and  peace,  during 
which  the  risen  and  glorified  saints  shall  judge  the  worid, 
and  execnte  the  law  of  the  Lord,  for  whom  they  have  suf- 
fered in  a  Christ-rejecting  age.  "  The  rest  of  the  dead 
lived  not  again  until  the  thonsand  years  were  finished." 
Satan  is  the  god  of  this  age  (2  Cor.  iv.  4  literal),  charac- 
terized as  "this  present  evil  age"  (Qal.  i.  4;  Tit.  ii.  12), 
but  he  will  not  be  of  the  age  to  come. 

How  can  the  Millennial  Age  begin  while  Satan  is  free 
to  create  trouble?  But  his  age  will  end  with  his  removal 
from  the  earth  and  his  confinement  in  "  the  bottomlesa 
pit,"  at  the  glorious  visible  appearing  of  Christ,  who  will 
then  start  the  new  age  whose  gloiy  He  will  share  with  His 
bride  (Kev.  xii.  1-xx.  6).  Thus  the  two  ages  are  clearly 
distinguished  from  each  other. 

I  would  almost  be  willing  to  stake  the  settlement  of  this 
question  upon  one  passage  which  contains  the  whole  issue 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Mission  of  the  Church  321 

in  a  single  brief  suggestion :  "  To  him  that  overcometb, 
will  I  grant  to  sit  with  me  in  m?  throne,  even  as  I  also 
overcame,  and  am  set  down  with  m;  Father  in  his  throne  " 
(Key.  iii.  21,  A.  V.).  Here  are  two  thrones,  as  plain  as 
language  can  be.  What  could  be  His  throne  bnt  that 
which  He  heirs  in  the  dynasty  of  David,  and  which  He 
takes  when  He  restores  the  Kingdom  to  Israel,  as  pre- 
viously set  forth  in  this  discuseion?  According  to  the 
post-millennial  view,  He  must  now  be  on  His  throne,  since 
this  is  the  last  dispensation,  and  the  kingdom  has  already 
been  set  up,  or  is  being  set  up,  by  the  Church.  But  he  de- 
clares He  is  in  His  Father's  throne,  which  is  undoubtedly 
the  throne  of  mediation  for  His  Church,  the  throne  of  His 
advocacy  with  the  Father  (Heb.  vii.  25;  1  John  ii.  1). 
When  He  comes  to  take  His  own  throne,  the  Church  —  the 
overcomers  —  wUl  sit  with  Him  there,  reigning  with  Him 
"  a  thousand  years  "  on  the  earth,  "  Then  cometh  the  end, 
when  he  shall  have  delivered  np  the  kingdom  to  Ood,  even 
the  Father,"  having  reigned  till  all  enemies  were  put  un- 
der His  feet,  including  those  of  the  post-millennial  revolt ; 
till  the  wicked  dead  were  judged,  death  itself  destroyed, 
and  the  new  heaven  and  new  earth  appeared,  wherein  law 
and  grace  shall  blend  in  the  eternal  reign  of  God  and  the 
redeemed.  With  this  interpretation  agree  aU  the  Scriff* 
tnres  bearing  on  the  subject. 

This  is  the  goal  of  missions  and  the  mission  of  the 
Church.  The  aim  of  the  Church  should  be  to  "  bring  back 
the  king"  who  is  exiled  from  the  world  (2  Sam.  six.  10). 
Her  mission  resembles,  in  one  respect,  that  of  John  the 
Baptist,  at  His  first  advent.  As  His  witness  in  the  world, 
her  ministry  should  ever  declare,  like  that  great  forerun- 
ner, "  There  cometh  one  after  me  " ;  "  Prepare  ye  the  way 
of  the  Lord."  While  this  thought  has  a  spiritual  applica- 
tion, we  cannot  doubt  its  literal  suggestlveness.  When  He 
succeeded  John,  one  of  His  first  acts  was  to  scoui^  from 
the  temple  the  trafiSckers  and  money-changers.  Once  again 
He  did  so,  at  His  triumphal  entry  into  Jerusalem,  which 
typifies  His  triumphal  return  to  earth  (Matt.  ixi.  9  with 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


322  BibUotheca  Sacra 

xzUi.  38-^9).  Who  doubtB  that  this  retarn  will  be  eig- 
nalized  by  purging  GhriBteDdom  in  like  manner? 

The  coming  of  Christ  In  His  kingdom  is  a  coming  in 
conquest  like  DaTid  (Dan.  TiL  13-27;  Eev.  xix.  11-21; 
zx.  1-3),  and  in  glory  and  peace  like  Solomon,  to  reign 
over  the  whole  earth  thos  snbdned  (Ps.  Ixxii.;  Ber.  zz. 
4-6).  Passages  conld  be  multiplied,  bat  Isa.  Ixr.  18-25 
and  Ixvi.  8-21  contain  striking  declarations  of  that  era  of 
righteoosness,  peace,  plenty,  and  longerity  introdaced  by 
His  return,  the  birth-pangs  of  Israel,  and  the  report  of 
His  glory  among  the  nations.  "And  the  Lord  shall  be  king 
over  aU  the  earth ;  in  that  day  shall  the  Lord  be  one,  and 
his  name  one"  (Zech.  ziv.  9). 

Such  a  goal  invests  the  work  of  missions  with  tran- 
scendent interest.  No  unscriptural  fancy,  like  that  of  con- 
verting the  world,  under  present  conditions,  can  gird  the 
Ohurch  with  hope,  ^igrosa  her  energies,  and  command  her 
resonrces.  But  with  eyea  fixed  on  this  goal,  there  is  a 
prospect  that  intensifies  the  sense  of  responsibility,  loosens 
the  hold  on  worldly  possessions,  and  leads  to  a  consecra- 
tion to  the  cause  of  missions  that  pulsates  with  satisfac- 
tion. Its  practical  force  is  constantly  mentioned  in  the 
New  Testament.  If  ChristianB  are  taught  "  to  live  soberly, 
righteously,  and  godly  in  the  present  age,"  the  motive  is 
presented,  "  looking  for  the  blessed  hope  and  appearing  of 
the  glory  of  our  great  Gk>d  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ."  In 
the  work  of  missions,  how  it  deepens  the  conviction  that 
the  King's  business  requires  haste!  Under  its  influence, 
the  task  of  evangelizing  the  world  in  a  single  generation 
seems  practicable,  and  missionaries  labor  with  an  assur- 
ance of  imminent  triumph. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE  RELIGION  OF  MOSES 

HABOLD    H.   WIENm,   U.A.,  LL.B.,   OF  UNCOLn'S   INN 
B  ABBI BTEB- AlVLA  W 

The  views  entertained  oo  the  Pentateachal  question  in- 
fluence, and  are  influenced  hj,  the  conception  held  of  the 
history  of  Monotheism  in  IsraeL  In  a  paper  on  "  Hebrew 
Monotheism "  which  appeared  in  the  Bibuothbca  Sacra 
for  October,  1907  (voL  Ixiv.  pp.  609-637),  I  showed  how 
the  current  ideas  which  derive  from  Eaenen  are  flatiy 
contradicted  by  the  evidence  and  his  own  emphatic  state- 
ments made  nnder  the  influence  of  an  impartial  examina- 
tion of  that  evidence.*  It  is  now  desirable  to  approach  the 
subject  from  another  point  of  view;  for,  if  I  mistake  not, 
there  is  Egyptian  material  which  is  not  without  its  bear- 
ing on  Old  Testament  criticism  and  the  trend  of  Israel's 
thought.* 

I 

The  Ezodue  from  Egypt  took  place  in  the  second  year 
of  the  Pharaoh  Memeptah,  i.e.  (on  the  basis  of  the  dates 
given  by  Petrie  and  Breasted)  not  earlier  than  1233  b.c. 
nor  later  than  1223  b.c.  A  century  and  a  half  earlier,  in 
the  reign  of  Amenhotep  IV.  {Akhenaten,  Akhnaton,  Ikhna- 
ton,  Khuenaton),  1383-1365  b.c.   (Petrie)  or  1375-1358  B.C. 

'Soon  after  the  appeanuice  of  tbat  article  a  follower  of  Kue- 
nen's  met  me.  He  admitted  tbat  his  leader  had  been  'a  bit  care- 
lesB,'  but  Bald  he  would  take  the  matter  up  "  tor  the  dead  man." 
He  promised  an  answer  by  letter,  evincing  repugnance  to  the  sug- 
gestion that  an  article  would  be  better.  I  waa  much  touched  br 
the  piety  of  his  beautiful  sentiments  about  "the  dead  man,"  but 
though  His  Majesty's  Poetmaater-general  has  succeeded  In  securing 
the  due  delivery  of  my  other  correspondence  during  the  Interven- 
ing years  with  tolerable  regularity,  no  defense  of  the  careless  Kue- 
nen  has  reached  me. 

'  While  the  discussion  that  follows  has  benefited  by  the  work 
of  many  Bcholan  it  owes  most  to  Professor  J,  H.  Breasted'a  Devel- 
opment of  Religion  and  Thought  in  Ancient  Egypt. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


321  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

(Breasted),  there  arose  in  Egypt  a  moootheUtic  worship 
of  the  Ateu  or  Atoa,  to  which  it  is  worth  while  to  devote 
some  attention,' 

By  way  of  introduction  a  few  sentences  may  be  qnoted 
from  Professor  W.  M.  Flinders  Petrie's  "  Beligion  of  An- 
cient Egypt"  (1906),  pages  54 f.:— 

"Aten  was  a  conception  of  the  sun  entirely  different  to 
Ra.  No  human  or  animal  form  was  ever  attached  to  it; 
and  the  adoration  of  the  physical  power  and  action  of  the 
snn  was  the  sole  devotion.  So  far  as  we  can  trace,  it  was 
a  worship  entirely  apart  and  different  from  every  other 
type  of  religion  in  Egypt.  .  .  .  The  Aten  was  the  only  in- 
stance of  a  '  jealous  god '  in  Egypt,  and  this  worship  was 
exclusive  of  all  others,  and  claims  universality.  There  are 
traces  of  it  shortly  before  Amenhotep  III.  He  showed 
some  devotion  to  it,  and  it  was  his  son  who  took  the  name 
of  Akhenaten,  the  glory  of  the  Aten,'  and  tried  to  enforce 
this  as  the  sole  worship  of  Egypt  But  it  fell  immediately 
after,  and  is  lost  in  the  next  dynasty.  ...  In  the  hymn  to 
the  Aten  the  universal  scope  of  this  power  is  proclaimed 
as  the  source  of  all  life  and  action,  and  every  land  and  peo- 
ple are  subject  to  it,  and  owe  to  it  their  existence  and 
their  allegiance.  No  such  grand  theology  had  ever  ap- 
peared in  the  world  before,  so  far  as  we  know;  and  it  is 
the  forerunner  of  the  later  monotheist  religions,  while  it 
is  even  more  abstract  and  impersonal,  and  may  well  rank 
as  a  scientific  theism."  * 

'  For  a  popular  volume  dealing  with  this  mouarcb,  see  Mr.  Ar- 
thur B.  P.  Weisall'B  LUe  and  Times  of  A^hnaton,  Pharaoh  of 
Egypt  (1910).  This  writer  Bets  out  parallel  passages  of  Akhna' 
ton's  hymn  and  Psalm  civ.  on  pp.  1561.  So  does  J.  H.  Breaated 
on  pp.  871 B.  of  his  History  of  Egypt  (2d  ed.  1909),  though  less 
ful^. 

'Now  rendered  "Aton  Is  satisfied"  (see  Breasted,  The  Devel- 
opment oLReligion  and  Thought  In  Ancient  Egypt  [1912],  p.  323). 
H.  M.  W. 

'  In  view  of  later  work  some  of  the  views  that  bave  been  held 
about  the  history  of  the  Aton  worship  must  be  modified.  See 
Ludwlg  Borchardt,  "Aus  der  Arbeit  an  den  Funden  von  Tell 
el-Amama,  Vorliluflger  Bericht"  in  Mitteilungen  der  I>eutacben 
Orient-Gesellscbaft,  March,  1917  (No.  57,  pp.  24  ff.).  This  scholar 
holds  that  the  cult  of  the  sun  flourished  under  Amenopbls  III., 
but  not  to  the  exclusion  of  the  rest  of  the  pantheon,  as  in  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1M9]  The  Religion  of  Moaes  325 

Out  knowledge  of  this  religion  is  derived  from  one  long 
and  several  shorter  hymns  and  a  few  short  prayers.  A. 
Erman  (Die  ^gyptiache  Religion  [2d  ed.  1909],  p.  78) 
points  oat  with  justice  that  the  expression  '  Light  or  heat ' 
which  la  in  the  solar  disc '  proves  learned  speculation  to 
have  been  an  element  in  the  formation  of  the  new  faith, 
and  this  Is  confirmed  by  its  theological  conceptions.'  There 
are  naturally  many  points  in  connection  with  its  lilstory 
as  to  which  Egyptologists  are  not  at  one.  Most  of  these 
do  not  concern  the  present  inquiry.  For  the  purposes  of 
Old  Testament  criticism  it  is  immaterial  wiiether  the  per- 
sonal share  of  Akfaenaton  was  a  little  greater  or  a  little 
less,  or  whether  those  scholars  are  right  who  contend  "  that 
the  religious  and  poetical  matter,  developed  in  the  hymns 
.  .  .  consists  of  topics  already  familiar  to  everyone.  The 
originality  lent  to  the  hymns  is  probably  like  new  wine  in 
old  bottles;  it  expresses  old  beliefs  in  new  rhythms,  and 
gives  a  touch,  as  far  as  we  can  jadge,  more  vivid  and  per- 
sonal to  subjects  treated  by  older  writers."  * 

In  the  first  instance  the  following  points  call  for  atten- 
tion:— 

I&ter  years  of  Amenophla  IV.  He  thinks  that  the  later  GgyptlanB 
reprobated  the  political  sterility  of  the  monarch  much  more  than 
his  exaggeration  of  the  Aton  worship.  Priests  of  the  solar  disc 
are  found  under  the  Ramessldee.  All  that  happened  was  that 
the  god  was  reduced  from  the  position  of  preeminence  given  him 
by  Akbeoaton  to  his  earlier  position  in  the  Egyptian  pantheon. 
See  also  his  observations  on  p.  18  of  No.  6E  (Dec.  1914). 

'  N.  de  O.  Davles,  The  Rock-Tombs  of  El-Amama,  part  I.  (1903) 
p.  46,  renders  "splendour." 

*Cp.  Davles,  op.  cit. 

■A.  Moret.  Kings  and  Qods  of  Egypt  (1912),  pp.  59ft.  See  also 
especially  Davles,  op.  cit,  p.  44:  "  So  far  as  we  can  see,  it  does 
not  greatly  differ  in  essential  doctrine  from  systems  that  existed 
In  Egypt  before  and  after  it,  but  only  in  its  uncompromising  attl> 
tude  to  dissenting  faiths,  and  the  consistency  with  which,  from 
the  beginning,  it  accepted  the  positive  and  negative  consequences 
of  its  doctrine.  In  both  respects  we  may  recognize  the  person- 
ality of  its  founder  rather  than  the  motive  power  of  its  creed." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


326  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jul?. 

1.  There  Existed  a  monotheistic  belief  before  the  time 
of  Hoses. 

2.  The  facts  that  will  be  adduced  show  concliuiTely 
that  Moses  moat  have  been  perfectly  familiar  with  its  ideas. 

3.  Bome  of  the  phrases  and  thoaghts  of  this  belief  re- 
cur in  the  later  literature  of  Israel  in  a  form  so  clMel? 
similar  as  to  exclude  any  theory  of  complete  independaice. 
It  may  be  that  they  originated  in  Egypt  or  that  both  Egypt 
and  Israel  borrowed  them  from  some  common  scarce;  but 
the  likeness  is  too  great  for  any  hypothesis  of  separate 
origin. 

The  nature  of  the  "  teaching  "  ^  of  Akhenaton,  as  it  waa 
always  called,  may  bb  gathered  from  the  following  quota- 
tions : — 

"  Thy  dawning  is  rery  beautiful,  O  living  Ka,  etc.,  etc., 
the  living  Aten,  beside  whom  there  is  no  oth^,  giving  health 
to  the  eyes  by  his  rays,  he  who  [has  made]  all  that  is! 
Thou  risest  in  the  eastern  horizon  of  heaven  to  give  life  to 
all  that  thou  hast  made,  viz.  mankind,  cattle,  flying  and 
fluttering  things,  with  [all  kinds]  of  reptiles  whidi  are  on 
the  earth  "  (Davies,  El-Amama,  part  i.  pp.  49  f.  [my  ital- 
ics.  H.  M.  W.]). 

"  I  have  come  with  praises  to  thy  rays,  O  living  Atai, 
sole  <god).  Thou  art  eternal,  Heaven  is  thy  temple  in 
which  thou  makest  thine  appearance  every  [day],"  etc. 
{op.  cit.,  part  vi,  p.  SI). 

The  following  excerpts  from  the  longer  hymn  are  taken 
from  Breasted's  "  Development  of  Religion  and  Thought  in 
Ancient  Egypt."  Some  passages  of  Psalm  civ.  are  placed 
in  tlie^  margin  for  comparison.* 

■  Cf.  the  Mosaic  Torah  and  DeuL  Ir.  1,  «tc. 

'Pull  tranelatlonB  of  the  lonser  hymn  are  given  by  N.  de  O. 
Davlea,  El-Amaraa,  part  vl.  (1908)  pp.  29  0.;  W.  H.  Flinders 
Petrie.  HlBtory  of  Egypt  (3d  ed.  1899),  vol.  11.  pp.  215  ft.;  A.  E.  P. 
Welgrall.  The  Life  and  Times  of  Akhnaton  (191ft),  pp.  l&ftfC.;  A. 
Heret,  Kings  and  Gods  of  Egypt  (1912),  pp.  65 ft.;  J.  H.  Breasted, 
History  of  Egypt  (2d  ed.  1909),  pp.  STltt.;  Development,  etc, 
pp.  324tt.;  O.  A.  Barton,  Archsology  and  the  Bible  (2d  ed.  1917), 
pp.  403  ft. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919] 


The  Religion  of  Moaea 


327 


AKHITATOR'8    HTKH 

Wben  tliou  settest  In  the  weetem 

horlEon  of  tbe  sky, 
The  earth  1b  In  darkncBB  like  the 

dead; 
They  sleep  In  their  chambers, 
Their  heads  are  wrapped  up. 
Their  nofltrlU  ere  stopped, 
And  none  seeth  the  other. 
While  all  their  things  are  stolen 
Which  are  under  their  heads. 
And  they  know  it  not. 
Every  Hon  cometh  forth  from  his 

den, 
All  serpents,  they  stlne. 
Darkness.  .  .  . 
The  vorld  Is  In  silence. 
He  that  made  them  resteth  In  his 

horizon. 
Bright    is   the   earth    when    thou 

rlseat  in  the  horizon. 
When  thou  sblnest  as  Aton  by  da; 
Thou  drlTeat  away  the  darkness. 
When  thou  sendest  forth  thy  rays, 
Tbe  Two   I^nds   (Bgypt)   are  In 

dally  fesUTlty, 
Awake    and  standing    upon  their 

feet 
When  thou  hast  raised  them  up. 
Tbelr  limbs  bathed,  they  take  their 

clothing. 
Their  arms  uplifted   In  adoration 

to  thy  dawning. 
(Then)   in  all  the  world  they  do 

their  work. 
All  cattle  rest  upon  their  pastur- 
age. 
The  trees  and  the  plants  flourish. 
The  birds  flutter  In  their  marshes. 
Their  wings  uplifted  In  adoration 

to  thee. 
All  the  sheep  dance  upon  their  feet, 
All  winged  tbJngs  fly. 
They  live  when   thou  hast  shone 


PSALX  otv 
Tbou  makest  darkness,  and 

it  is  night. 
Wherein  all  the  beasts  of  the 

forest  do  creep  forth. 
The  young  lions    roar   after 

their  prey. 
And    seek    their    food    from 

Qod  (ver.  30-21). 


The  sun  ariseth,  they  slink 

away. 
And  couch  In  their  dens  (Ter. 

22). 


Han    goeth    forth    unto    his 

work, 
And  to  his  labour  until  the 

evening  (ver.  23). 


Tbe  trees  of  the  Lord  bare 

their  flU, 
The  cedars  of  Lebanon,  which 

he  hath  planted; 
Wherein  the  birds  make  their 

nests; 
As  for  the  stork,  the  flr^trees 

are  her  bouse. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


BibUotheca  Sacra 


[July, 


AKBIfATOR'fi   BIUK 


Tlie  barques  Ball  up-ntreain 
and  down-stream  alike. 

Bveiy  highway  la  open  be- 
cause thou  dawneat 

The  fish  In  the  river  leap  up 
before  thee. 

Thy  rays  are  in  the  midst 
of  the  great  green  sea. 


How  manifold  aretbyworka! 
They  are  hidden  from  before 

(no, 
0    Sole    Ood,    whose   powers 

no  other  poasesaetb. 
Thou  didst  create  the  eartb 

according  to  thy  heart' 
Wbfle  thou  wast  alone: 


Thou  haet  set  a  Nile  In  the  Who    sendest    forth    springs    into 

sky;  the  valleya. 

When  It  falletb  for  them,  They  run  between  the  mountains; 

It   maketb    waves    upon    the  They  give  drink  to  every  beast  of 


The  high  mountains     are   for    the 

wild  goats: 
Tlie  rocks  are     a     refuge  for  the 

conies  (ver.  16-lS). 
Yonder  sea,  great  and  wide. 
Therein    are    creeping    things    in- 
numerable. 
Living  creatures,   both   small   and 

great 
There  go  the  ships; 
There  is  leviathan,  whom  thou  baat 

formed   to  sport    therein. 
All  of   them   wait   for   tbee  (ver. 

26-27). 
How  manifold  are  thy  works,  O 

Loud! 
In  wisdom  hast  thou  made  them 

all: 
The  earth  is  full  of  thy  creatures 

(ver.  2<). 


mountains, 
Like  the  great  gre^i  sea. 


the  field. 
The  wild  asses  Quench  their  ttairsL 


Watering  their  fields  la  their      Who  waterest  the  mountains  from 
towns  thine  upper  chambers    (ver.  10- 

13). 

The  waters  stood  above  the  moun- 
tains  (ver.  6). 
Tiioa  makest  the  seasons  Who    appolntedst     the    moon     for 

In    order    to   create   all    thy  seasons; 

work:  The  sun  knoweth  his  going  down 

Winter  to  bring  them  cool-         (ver.  19). 


"'Either  'pleasure'   or   ' nndwstasdlng '   here"  (Breasted,   p. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919] 


The  Religion  of  Moses 


AKHR  axon's    HTHIt 

Thou  didst  make  the  distant 

sk7  to  rise  therein, 
In  order  to  behold  all  that 

thou  hast  made. 
Thou  alone,  Bhinlng   In  thy 

form  as  living  Aton, 
Dawning,     glittering,     going 

afar  and  returning. 

Thou  art  in  m7  heart. 
There  Is  no  other  that  know- 

eth  thee 
Save  thr  son  lUmaton. 
Thou  hast  made  him  wise 
In  tby  designs  and   in  th? 

might 
The  world  Is  In  tby  hand. 
Even    as    thou    hast   made 

When  thou  bast  risen  they 

live. 
When  thou  settest  they  die: 
For  thou  art  length  of  life  of 

thyself. 
Men  lire  through  thee 


pBALif  otr 
Who  covereet  thyself  with  light  as 

with  a  garment. 
Who    Btretcbest    out    the    heavens 

like  a  curtain  {ver.  2). 


I  will  sing  unto  the  Lobd  as  long 

as  I  live; 
I  will  sing  praise  to  my  Ood  while 

I  have  my  being. 
Let  my  musing  be  sweet  onto  him; 
As  for  me,   I  will  rejoice  in  tha 

LoBD  (ver.  33  f.). 
All  of  them  wait  for  thee 
Tbat  thou  mayest  give  them  their 

food  in  due  season. 
Thou    glvest    It    unto    them,    they 

gather  It; 
Thou  openeat  thy  hand,  they  are 

Batlsfled  with  good. 
Thou  hldest  thy  face,  they  vanish; 
Thou    wlthdrawest     their     breath, 

they  perish, 
And  return  to  their  dust 
Thou  sendest  forth  tby  spirit,  they 

are  created; 
And  thou  renewest  the  face  of  the 

earth. 
Btay  the  glory  of  the  Lobd  endure 

forever  (ver.  27-31). 
Who  didst  establlBb  the  earth  upon 

its  foundation  (ver.  B). 


Breasted  (Development,  etc.,  p.  329)  thinke  that  the 
hymn  "  doabtlesa  represents  an  excerpt,  or  a  series  of  frag- 
ments excerpted,  from  the  ritnal  of  Aton,  as  it  vas  cele- 
brated from  day  to  day  in  the  Aton  temple  at  Amama." 

It  cannot  be  disputed  that  the  religion  of  all  these  ex- 
tracts is  a  form  of  pare  monotheism.  Bat  neither  can  there 
be  any  doabt  that  some  form  of  connection  exists  between 
portions  of  the  great  royal  hymn  and  Psalm  civ.    Indeed, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


330  Bibliotkeca  Sacra  [Jnl;r 

when  the  two  forms  are  carefully  ezammed  in  their  en- 
tirety, the  impressioD  left  on  the  mind  is  that  the  Hebrew 
IB  answering  Akhenaton  (see,  for  instance,  rer.  33  f.  with 
theparalleI),thoughhemay  have  bad  before  him  a  differ^t 
set  of  excerpts,  excluding  some  of  the  matter  contained  in 
our  hymn.  Under  the  influence  of  the  evolutionary  theory 
the  commentators  on  the  Psalm  take  little  notice  of  the 
Egyptian  hymn.  Duhm  and  Brigga  ■  do  not  mention  it. 
Kittel  prints  it  in  an  appendix  withont  comment.  And  no 
other  course  is  open  to  them.  Tbe  evolutionary  school 
claimed  confidently  that  nobody  thought  thus  for  centuries 
after  David.  What  use,  then,  conld  they  make  of  historical 
material  which  proves  the  ideas  to  have  been  a  century  and 
a  half  earlier  than  Hoses?  Tbe  hymn  shows  irrefragably 
that  some  of  the  fundamental  conceptions  and  phrases 
were  familiar  long  before  the  Hebrew  poem  was  com- 
posed (on  any  view  of  its  authorship),  whether  we  sup- 
pose them  to  have  originated  in  Egypt  or  to  be  tak^i  from 
the  praises  of  some  Syrian  deity,  such  as  the  El  Elyon, 
the  Qod  Most  Hi^,  possessing  heaven  and  earth,  who  was 
worshiped  by  Melchizedek  of  Jerusalem.*  Aye,  they  were 
known  before  Moses,  and  the  Psalm  makes  it  clear  that 
the  knowledge  of  them  never  died.  Taken  in  conjonction 
with  the  facts  we  are  now  to  consider,  it  proves  up  to  the 
hilt  that  Moses  was  acquainted  with  monotheism. 

The  Aton  worship  failed  to  establish  itself  as  the  ex- 
clusive religion  of  Egypt;  but,  as  we  have  seen,  it  con- 
tinned  to  exist,  and  its  priests  are  found  under  the  Bames- 
sides.  There  is,  moreover,  a  further  point  of  great  import- 
ance. While  the  Aton  party  had  been  worsted  by  the 
priests  of  Amon,  many  of  the  attributes  of  the  Aton  were 

'Brlggs  amigns  th«  PBalm  to  tlie  Oreek  age'- 

■Tbe  reference  to  ehlpa  would  hardly  favor  Jerusalem  as  Uio 
place  of  origin.  Each  of  the  two  poems  Is  strfbtngly  faithful  to 
the  geograph?  of  its  own  coontrr.  The  hymn  shows  the  Influ- 
ence of  the  Egyptian  bus,  the  Nile,  and  the  general  geographical 
and  historical  conditions  of  Akhenaton*B  Egypt  very  clearly.  The 
Psalm  bears  the  Impress  of  Palestine  and  the  worship  of  Israel's 
Ood. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moaes  331 

ascribed  to  the  victorioue  god.  Perhaps  the  reasoning  was 
that  if  Amon  coald  visibly  worst  Aton  he  must  at  least  be 
entitled  to  all  the  attributes  ascribed  to  his  defeated  rival. 
Breasted  quotes  some  hymns  that  throw  light  on  this 
matter.  The  victory  of  Amon  is  celebrated  in  the  follow- 
ing IIdbb: — 

"  Tbou  flndeet  him  who  transgreBaeB  agalnBt  thee; 

Woe  to  him  who  asBailB  thee! 

Thy  city  endures; 

But  he  who  asaalla  thee  falle. 

Fie  upon  blm  who  tranBgreBses  agoinat  thee  In  ever?  lani. 

The  BUD  of  him  who  knows  thee  not  goes  down,  O  Amon! 
But  as  for  him  who  knows  thee,  he  shines. 
The  forecourt  of  htm  who  assailed  thee  is  in  darkneas. 
But  the  whole  earth  Is  In  llsht.'" 

Of  another  composition  Breasted  writes: — 
"  Even  the  old  monotheistic  phrases  have  here  and  there 
enrvived,  and  this  hymn  employs  them  without  compunc- 
tion thongh  constantly  referring  to  the  gods.    It  eays: 
" '  Sole  likeness,  maker  of  what  Is, 

Sole  and  only  one,  maker  of  what  exists. 

From  whose  eyes  men  Issued, 

From  whOBe  mouth  the  gods  came  forth 

Maker  of  herba  for  the  cattle. 

And  the  tree  of  life  for  mankind, 

Who  maketh  the  sustenance  of  the  flBb  [In]  the  stream. 

And  the  birds  that  traverse  the  sky. 

Who  giveth  breath  to  that  which  le  In  the  e^, 

And  maketh  to  lire  the  son  of  the  worm, 

Who  maketh  that  on  which  the  gnats  live. 

The  worms  and  the  insects  likewise, 

Who  supplleth  the  needs  of  the  mice  In  their  btries, 

Who  sustaineth  alive  the  birds  In  every  tree. 

Hail  to  thee,  wbo  bast  made  all  these. 

Thou  sole  and  only  one,  with  many  arms. 

Thou  sleeper  waking  while  all  men  sleep, 

Seeking  good  things  for  his  cattle. 

Amon,  enduring  in  all  things, 

Atum-Haraktate, 

Praise  to  thee  In  all  that  they  say. 

Jubilation  tA  thee,  for  thy  tarrying  with  us, 
■Development,  etc,  pp.  S4Gt. 

Vol  LXXVL    No.  303.    G 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


332  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Joly, 

Obeieance  to  thee,  vtao  didst  create  us, 

"Hall  to  thee,"  aay  aU  cattle; 

"Jubilation  to  thee,"  s&yB  evety  countrr. 

To  the  height  of  heaven,  to  the  breadth  of  earth. 

To  the  depths  of  the  eea.'"' 

**A  hymn  to  OsiriB  of  the  same  age,"  continues  Breasted, 
*'  says  to  him :  '  Thou  are  the  father  and  the  mother  of 
men,  they  live  from  thy  breath.' " 

tn  the  light  of  these  facts  it  is  impossible  to  hold  that 
an  adopted  son  of  an  Egyptian  princess  could  have  been 
ignorant  of  monotheism.  The  continuing  worship  of  the 
Aton,  the  influence  exercised  by  its  monotheistic  teaching 
on  the  liturgies  of  other  gods,  the  reappearance  of  the  con- 
ceptions and  phrases  of  Akhenatou  in  the  Hebrew  field 
some  centuries  later,  all  prove  that  no  educated  Egyptian 
of  the  Mosaic  age  could  have  been  unacquainted  with  mon- 
otheistic thought. 

But  there  is  a  further  question.  A  monotheistic  religion 
arises  —  perhaps,  as  we  shall  see,  one  actually  influenced 
by  the  worBhip  of  the  Syrian  Baal.  It  is  overthrown  by 
another  Egyptian  god,  whose  worship  promptly  takes  over 
the  monotheistic  phrases  connected  with  the  defeated  deity. 
When  the  gods  of  Egypt  are  in  turn  defeated  by  the  Baal 
of  Israel,  Who,  we  must  remember,  was  emphatically  a 
jealous  God,  is  it  likely  that  this  Deity,  who  was  held  to 
be  "  maker  of  what  exists,  maker  of  herbs  for  the  cattle 
and  the  tree  of  life,"  should  not  have  been  proclaimed  by 
His  servant  to  be  "  the  sole  and  only  one,"  "  beside  whom 
there  is  no  other"?  The  struggle  in  Egypt  had  not  been 
a  war  between  armies.  It  had  been  a  contest  between 
divinities,  the  Ood  of  Israel  and  the  gods  of  Egypt.  Could 
the  Victor  be  regarded  as  something  less  not  merely  than 
the  defeated  deities,  but  than  the  Aton  whom  they  had 
conquered  at  an  earlier  date?  Or  could  the  Creator  be 
less  the  sole  Ood  than  the  sun  which  He  had  made?  When 
the  facts  are  candidly  examined,  is  it  really  possible  to 
hold  a  priori  that  Moses  could  have  failed  to  regard  his 
God  as  the  one  supreme,  exclusive  Kuler  over  all  that  is? 
>  Op.  dt.,  pp.  847  L 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moses  333 

Or  is  it  scientific  to  endeavor  to  excise  from  Exodus  all 
moQctheistic  expressions,  or  to  argue  that  monotheism  is 
the  reBnlt  of  the  teaching  of  the  prophets?  To  the  unaci- 
entific  dogma  of  the  late  origin  of  monotheism,  History 
replies  in  no  uncertain  voice,  that  the  idea  was  older  than 
Hosee  and  thoroughly  familiar  to  him. 

Many  scholars  think  that  the  name  of  Aton  is  none 
other  than  the  Semitic  word  Adon,  lord,  and  Professor 
A.  H.  Sayce  holds  that  this  worship  came  from  Asia; — 

"The  Qod  of  Kbu-n-Aten,  in  fact,  has  much  in  common 
with  the  Semitic  Baal.  Like  Baal,  he  is  the  '  lord  of  lords,' 
whose  visible  symbol  is  the  solar  orb.  Like  Baal,  too,  he 
is  a  jealous  god,  and  the  father  of  mankind.  ...  On  the 
other  hand,  between  Aten  and  the  Semitic  Baal  there  was 
a  wide  and  essential  difference.  The  monotheism  of  Khu-n- 
Aten  was  pantheistic,  and  as  a  result  of  this  the  god  he 
worshipped  was  the  god  of  the  whole  universe.  The  char- 
acter and  attributes  of  the  Semitic  Baal  were  clearly  and 
sharply  defined.  He  stood  outside  the  creatures  he  had 
made  or  the  chOdren  of  whom  he  was  the  father.  His  king- 
dom was  strictly  limited,  his  power  itself  was  circumscribed. 
He  was  the  '  lord  of  heaven,'  separate  from  the  world  and 
from  the  matter  of  which  it  was  composed." ' 

We  shall  consider  some  facts  relating  to  the  Baal  at  a 
later  stage.  For  the  present  we  may  just  recall  one  re- 
sult of  textual  criticism.  In  all  the  early  books  of  the  Old 
Testament  the  word  "  Baal "  was  applied  freely  to  the  God 
of  the  patriarchs.  If  to  their  conception  of  the  Semitic 
Baal  we  add  those  ideas  of  the  Aton  worship  which  are 
shared  by  all  the  great  teachers  of  Israel's  religion  and  the 
Name  which  was  revealed  to  Moses,  what  do  we  get? 


On  turning  to  the  patriarchal  age,  we  are  confronted 
with  a  new  preliminary  difBculty,  the  existence  of  a  god 
Bethel  whose  divinity  appears  to  have  been  recognized  by 
persons  to  whom  the  Elephantine  finds  have  introduced  us. 
It  happens  that  the  correct  translation  of  the  Massoretic 
text  of  Gen.  ixii.  13,  ^KTi'a  bnn  '3:n.  is,  "  I  am  the  God, 
"The  Religion  of  Ancient  Egypt  (2d  ed.  1913).  p.  9S. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


331  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

Bethel";  and  thiB  is  accepted  by  Dp.  C.  F.  Bnmey,'  who 
thinks  "  we  may  perhaps  recognize  a  primitiTe  identifica- 
tion of  the  stone  itself  with  the  drfty."  I  do  not  accept 
this  view;  but,  as  the  matter  is  one  of  considerable  diffl- 
cnlty,  it  will  be  well  to  state  the  facte  in  some  detail. 

The  Elephantine  papyri  speak  of  a  God  in'  (YHW),  Wbo 
is  undoubtedly  the  Ood  of  Israel.  The  communis  was, 
however,  very  mixed,  and  we  meet  with  other  gods.  In 
Pap.  27  (Bachau,  pp.  103  ff.')  we  find  Malkijah,  son  of 
Joshibjah,  described  as  a  Syrian  belonging  to  the  '  stand- 
ard *  of  Nebokndurri  (apparently  not  a  Jewish  '  stand- 
ard ') ,  complaining  of  certain  wrongs  alleged  to  have  been 
committed  against  him  by  another  Syrian.'  After  stating 
that  he  has  made  complaint  to  his  god  (i.e.  presamably  a 
temple  tribunal)  and  received  his  decision,  be  apparently 
proceeds  to  call  upon  the  defendant  to  take  an  oath  of 
purgation  before  [K*|'n^t<  Wi'^onn.  This  seems  to  mean 
HRM-Bethel  the  god,  pointing  to  a  Syrian  god  of  that 
name.  There  is  also  a  proper  name  HBM-nathan  =  HBM 
gave.  We  read  (Pap.  34,  Sachaxi,  pp.  126 f.),  'There  wit- 
nesses HRM-nathan,  sou  of  Bethelnathan,  son  of  Teos  (or 
Tachos).' 

A  long  list  of  contributions  *  (Pap.  18,  Sacbau,  pp.  72  ff.) 
is  headed,  "  These  are  the  names  of  the  Kmrp  lA'n  (Jew- 
ish or  Judaean  army)  who  gave  money  Kh^m  m-^  (for 
YHW  the  god)."    In  it,  however,  we  read: — 

■"New  Aramaic  P^yri  and  Old  Testament  HUtorr."  Church 
Quarterlr  Review,  vol.  Ixxlv.  p.  405  <No.  148,  July,  1912). 

'The  referencee  are  to  E.  Sachau.  Aramaieche  Papfrus  und 
OBtraka  (1911). 

'It  Is,  however,  noteworthy  that  a  man  ia  sometimes  called  a 
Byrian  la  one  paasage  and  a  Jew  la  another  (see  A.  van  Hooq- 
acker,  One  Commnnautfi  Judfio-Aramfoiine   [1916],  pp.  St.). 

'This  lettw  IB  doubtful. 

*  FNir  an  Bagllsh  translation  of  the  whole  document,  see  M. 
Spreagllng,  "The  Aramaic  Papyri  of  Elephantine  ia  BasUsh," 
Americaa  Journal  of  Theology,  vol.  zxll.  pp.  349  ff.  (No.  3,  July, 
1918).  HiB  diaeuMloDi  show  that  the  evidence  Is  quite  iDBuffident 
tor  any  ewtala  coaelnslottB  «a  moat  of  the  matteni  he  oonalden. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Beligion  of  Mosea  335 

)r6  (for  YHW)  12  keresh,  6  shekels. 

^Kn*3DrM>  (for  Asbambethel,  if  that  vocalisatioa  is  cor- 
rect) 7  keresh. 

Wi*3n»^  (for  Anathbeth«l)  12  keresh. 
Apparently,  therefore,  Ashambetbel  and  Anathbethel  vere 
dirinitiea.' 

Asbambethel  as  a  deity  derives  some  support  from  two 
proper  names  ^tissb'K  and  didick  in  Pap.  24  (Sachau,  p. 
95),  a  list  of  names  that  are  predominantly  of  Egyptian 
and  Babylonian  origin.  Here  we  must  compare  2  Kings 
xvii.  30,  where,  in  the  description  of  the  conduct  of  the  for- 
eign nationalities  settled  by  the  AsSyrians  in  Samaria,  we 
read,  "And  the  men  of  Hamath  madeMD*rH  (Asliima)." 
That  again  points  to  a  Syrian  divinity.  Amos  (viii.  14) 
denounces  those  who  swear  by  notnt  of  Samaria.  This  is 
ordinarily  rendered  '  ain  of  Samaria ' ;  but,  in  view  of  the 
Elephantine  material,  it  has  been  conjectured  that  we 
should  regard  it  as  the  proper  name,  A«himah  or  Ashmah 
of  Samaria. 

As  to  Anathbethel,  we  know  of  a  goddess  Anath  (see 
Breasted,  Ancient  Records,  vol.  iii.  p.  43,  "Anath  is  satis- 
fled  "  (reign  of  Seti  I.  ) ;  vol.  Hi.  p.  201,  "Anath  is  protec- 
tion" (reign  of  Barneses  II.) ;  vol.  iv.  p.  62,  "Montu  and 
Butekh  are  with  [him  (Ramses  III.)  in]  every  fray,  Anath 
and  Astarte  are  his  shield"),  and  place-names  like  Beth- 
Anatfa  and  Anathoth  tell  of  her  worship  in  early  times  by 
some  inhabitants  of  Canaan.'  Anati  {'n»)  occurs  as  a 
man's  name  not  only  in  this  Papyrus  (Sachau,  pp.  74,  79), 
but  also,  though  the  fact  is  generally  overlooked  in  this 
connection,  in  the  Araama  tablets  (Enudtzon,  170.  43). 
Further  wms  (Anath-YHW)  appears  in  Pap.  32  (Sachau, 
pp.  118  f.).  In  these  papyri,  YHW  is  called  the  God  of 
heaven,  and  Jer.  xliv.  denounces  with  great  emphasis  the 
worship  of  the  queen  of  heaven  by  the  Jews  in  Egypt.  That 
chapter  should  be  carefully  examined  in  this  connection. 

'In  any  case  Uie  beading  of  the  llat  does  not  fit  in  with  these 
facU. 

'See  further  De  V(^6,  Melanges  d'Archtologle  Orlentale,  pp. 
41  ff.,  and  compare  Anathotbljab.  1  Chroo.    vlK.  24. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


886  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Julji 

It  proves  the  worship  of  other  gods  by  Jewiah  colonies  in 
Egypt.  It  seems  quite  likely,  therefore,  that  Anath-YHW  may 
have  been  a  consort  of  the  God  of  heaven  Whom  the  Jews 
worshiped.  If  this  is  sound,  it  would  point  to  Anathbethel'a 
having  been  a  consort  of  the  god  Bethel.  On  the  other 
hand,  Bethel  might  possibly  (but  improbably)  be  taken  as 
a  place-name  in  these  two  words.  They  would  then  mean, 
respectively,  the  Anath  and  Asham  of  Bethel. 

A  Phoenician  god  Bethel  is  mentioned  in  a  treaty  made 
between  Bsarhaddon  and  Baal  of  Tyre.  In  busineea  rec- 
ords of  the  time  of  Artaxerxes  I.  we  find  a  personal  name 
BH-ili-nftri  in  which  Blt-ili  is  written  with  the  determi- 
native of  a  god,  and  there  is  other  evidence,^  The  papyri 
contain  the  name  Betheluathan  in  a  passage  quoted  abov^ 
and  also  mention  a  Bethelnathan  son  of  Jehonathan.  Sa- 
cbau  (pp.  82 1.)  quotes  other  names  compounded  with  Bethel. 
Lagrange  has  suggested  with  great  probability  that  we 
should  recognize  the  god  Bethel  in  Jer.  zlviil.  13:  "And 
Moab  shall  be  ashamed  of  Chemosh,  as  the  house  of  Israel 
was  ashamed  of  Beth-el  their  confidence." 

What  inferences  can  we  draw  from  these  facts?  In  the 
first  instance,  we  must  conclude  that  the  community  was 
exceedingly  mixed.  It  may  be  that  Van  Hoonacker  is 
right  in  holding  that  they  were  lai^ly  Samaritans.*.  Cer- 
tainly there  is  a  great  similarity  between  the  facts  we  find 
here  and  the  statement  of  2  Kings.  On  the  other  hand, 
there  is  also  a  striking  resemblance  to  the  cults  denounced 
by  Amos  and  Hosea,  and  it  may  very  well  be  that  the  Ele- 
phantine colony  contained  a  strong  admixtnre  of  descend- 
ants of  the  ten  tribes.  The  fact  to  which  attrition  has 
been  drawn  above,  that  one  and  the  same  man  is  described 
sometimes  as  a  Jew  and  sometimes  as  a  Syrian,  may  per- 
haps also  point  to  the  presence  of  Jews  whose  ancestors 
had  been   settled  in   Syria  before  migrating  to   Egypt.* 

■Zlmmem  In  B.  Schradefa  Die  KelllnBcbrltten  imd  das  Alts 
TeBtament  (2d  ed.  1903),  pp.  43Sf. 

'Op.  cit.,  pp.  82 fr. 

■Ve  know  rrom  1  Kings  xx.  34  of  an  Israelite  commercial  col- 
OD7  In  Damascus. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moses  337 

fiimilarl;  an  English  Jew  settling  in  some  other  country 
to-day  might  sometimes  be  called  the  Jew  and  sometimes 
the  Englishman.  Intermarriage,  which  was  prohibited  by 
the  Law  only  in  the  case  of  certain  tribes,  is  presumably 
responsible  in  whole  or  in  part  for  the  great  mixture  of 
names.  There  is,  moreover,  reason  to  believe  that  to  a 
great  extent  personal  names  had  ceased  to  have  a  religions 
significance  and  had  become  labels,  as  with  ns.^ 

On  the  other  hand,  except,  to  some  extent,  in  the  case 
of  Anath-THW  (who  appears  to  have  been  invented  as  a 
consort  for  Israel's  God  under  the  influence  of  the  cult  of 
Anath),  the  facta  aU  seem  to  point  to  the  inflnence  of  for- 
eign North  Syrian  divinities  rather  than  to  any  native 
Jewish  object  of  worship.  HRM-Bethel  appears  to  be  Syr- 
ian. Ashima  is  expressly  connected  with  Hamath;  and, 
if  we  should  read  this  name  in  Amos  vlii.  14,  the  inference 
is  that  the  Syrian  worship  had  penetrated  the  Northern 
Kingdom  as  did  that  of  the  Phoenician  Baal  in  the  days  of 
Abab,  but  without  ceasing  to  be  heretical  in  the  eyes  of 
the  faithful.  As  Anath  and  Bethel  were  also  Syrian  di- 
vinities, the  most  natural  view  is  that  Ashambethel  and 
Anathbethel,  like  EBM-Betbel,  should  be  regarded  in  the 
same  light.  If  they  were  worshiped  in  Israel  or  in  Judah, 
this  was  a  falling  away,  and  would  have  been  so  regarded 
by  the  faithful  in  every  age.  A  passage  in  2  Ejngs  (v. 
17  f.)  shows  us  the  converse  process.  Naaman,  the  Syrian, 
impressed  by  his  miraculous  experience,  adopts  the  wor- 
ship of  Israel's  Ood  even  in  Damascus.  But  possibly 
strict  worshipers  of  Bimmon  regarded  him  in  much  the 
same  way  as  the  prophets  viewed  Hebrew  worshipers  of 
Syrian  deities. 

Thus  it  appears  that  the  Elephantine  material  may  and 
does  throw  considerable  light  on  the  religious  circum- 
stances of  the  age  and  on  some  difBcnlt  prophetical  texts. 
It  does  not,  however,  appear  to  aid  in  the  criticism  of 

■See  3.  Dalchea,  Tbe  Jews  in  Babylonia  In  the  Time  of  Ezra 
and  Nebemlah  accordlns  to  Babylonian  InBcriptlons  (1910),  a 
abort  monoErapli  wblcb  ahould  be  read  by  all  who  bave  occasion 
to  deal  with  this  period. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


388  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [J11I7, 

the  Pentateach.  Looking  at  the  Old  Testara^it  history 
broadly,  we  may  aay  with  confidence  that  there  was  con- 
tinuous poIytheiBm  and  idolatry  among  the  people  till  the 
Exile  and  later ; '  but  the  particular  influences  and  dangers 
varied  to  some  extent  in  difFerent  epochs.  For  example, 
the  Phcenician  Baal  was  particularly  dangerous  in  the  age 
of  Ahab,  but  we  should  not  be  justified  in  reading  this 
back  to,  e.g.,  the  time  of  the  Judges.  Similarly  with  the 
Bethel-Ashima  group.  As  a  menace  to  the  pure  faith  of 
Israel  they  seem  to  me  to  belong  to  entirely  different  times 
from  any  that  fell  within  the  purview  of  the  Pentateuch. 
Solomon's  polygamy  and  imperialism  gave  rise  to  one  set 
of  dangers  for  Israel's  religion  (1  Kings  xL),  Jeroboam's 
schism  (1  Kings  xiii.  26  ff.)  to  another;  and  it  is  probable 
that  from  that  time  onward  anccessive  wares  of  foreign 
influence  affected  the  religious  practices  and  beliefs  of 
Israel. 

But  if  we  are  not  Justified  by  the  religious  history  in 
importing  the  god  Bethel  into  the  Book  of  Genesis,  the 
textual  facts  are  most  unfavorable  to  the  Massoretic  read- 
ing. I  agree  with  Dahse '  in  thinking  that  we  should  read 
not  '  Bethel,'  but  '  that  appeared  to  thee  in  the  place ' ;  and 
I  recall  the  fact  that  the  Hebrew  word  *  place,'  like  its 
Arabic  equivalent,  also  has  a  special  religious  meaning. 

For  these  reasons  I  cannot  accept  the  view  that  Oenesis 
recognizes  a  god  Bethel  as  the  object  of  Jacob's  worship. 

'Many  of  the  tacts  are  collected  In  an  Interestlns  article  liy 
ProfesBor  J.  H.  P.  Smith  on  "Jewleh  Religion  in  the  Fifth  Cen- 
tiU7  B.C.,"  American  Jouraal  of  Semitic  Languages,  vol.  xxxlU. 
Pti,  322-333  (July.  191T).  It  la  amusing  to  note  bis  astonishment 
(p.  328)  at  finding  a  statement  of  Jeremiah's  to  be  trae  after  all: 
"We  recall  with  fresh  underetandlng  that  Jeremiah  declared  'ac- 
cording to  the  ntimber  of  thy  cities  are  thy  gods,  O  Judah'  <Jer. 
zl.  13),  and  begin  to  suspect  that  Jeremiah  meant  just  witat  he 
aald"1  Those  who  are  tempted  to  heliere  in  the  evolutionary 
theory  should  contrast  his  picture  of  the  religion  of  the  Jewish 
masses  at  that  period  with  the,  Aton  faith. 

'See  his  Textkritiscfae  Materlalien  zur  Hezateuchrrage,  vol.  L 
(1912)  pp.  5f. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moses 


The  TetragrammatoD  fiin'  itflelf  may  or  may  not  have 
been  ased  in  Israel  or  outside  before  the  time  of  Moses. 
On  the  face  of  the  Massoretic  text  it  Beeme  clear  that  it 
had  been  in  common  use  tor  centaries  before  (see  especially 
Oen.  iv.  26,  "Then  hegan  men  to  call  upon  the  name  of 
the  Lohd").  Bat  textual  investigations  have  now  proved 
that  in  this  matter  we  cannot  rely  on  the  Massoretic  text,' 
and  when  we  read  (zvi.  13)  the  impossible  '  She  called  the 
name  of  the  Lobd  that  spake  onto  her,'  we  realize  that  the 
Tetragrammaton  has  been  deliberately  substituted  for  an- 
other word  or  words  in  occurrences  where  some  desig- 
nation of  the  Deity  followed  the  word  name  as  a  genitive. 
Insight  into  editorial  methods  enables  us  to  see  that  this 
is  dne  to  the  influence  of  Ex.  iii.  15.  If  *  this  is  my  name 
forever,  and  this  is  my  memorial  unto  all  generations,' 
then,  so  ran  the  argument,  it  must  necessarily  be  read 
wherever  in  any  generation  there  is  a  reference  to  the  name 
of  the  Deity.  Consequently  the  argument  from  Oen.  iv.  26, 
etc.,  is  worthless.  The  only  other  striking  passage  is  xxviii. 
20  ff.,  dealing  with  Bethel.  But  obviously  if  baal  or  some 
similar  word  has  been  removed  from  the  text  of  Genesis, 
and  if  the  editors  regularly  treated  designations  of  the 
Deity  as  variable  elements  to  be  brought  into  accord  with 
the  principles  they  had  deduced  from  Biblical  verses,  the 
probative  value  of  this  passage  is  no  higher  than  that  of 
others. 

Professor  N.  J.  Schlflgl,  as  the  result  of  an  exhaustive 
examination  of  the  textual  material,  cannot  convince  him- 
self that  the  Tetragrammaton  is  original  in  any  passage 
before  Ex.  iii.  12,'  and  certainly  the  general  drift  of  the 
revelations  to  Moses  and  the  Pharaoh's  ignorance  of  the 
Lord  (Ex.  t.  2)  would  fit  in  well  with  the  view  that  the 
Kame  was  new. 

'8e*  TheologlBch  TlJdBChrttt,  1918,  pp.  164-169;   BS.  Jan.  1815, 
pp.  134-153;  April.  1916,  pp.  308^33;  ApriU  1916,  p.  332,  footnote; 
Oct.  1916;  April.  1917,  pp.  315  It.;  April,  1918,  pp.  339  0.;   Metlio- 
dlBt  Quarterly  ReTlev.  April,  1918,  pp.  183  tt. 
'Blbllsche  ZeltBchrlft.  vol.  xlll.  (1916)  p.  113. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


340  ,  Biiliotheca  Sacra  [Jnly, 

The  theorj  that  the  TetraframmatoD  occurs  before  the 
time  of  Moses  in  cuneiform  iiiBcriptiona  has  been  conclu- 
sively disproTed  by  Professor  D.  D.  LudtenbiU,*  following 
earlier  work  of  Daiches,  which,  however,  is  less  convinc- 
ing. I  only  quote  one  sentence:  "But  so  long  as  there 
are  no  other  reasons  for  supposing  that  the  name  of  the 
Hebrew  deity  would  occur  in  a  Babylonian  {not  a  Bebrew) 
name  five  hundred  years  before  the  time  of  David,  and 
there  certainly  are  no  such  reasons,  and  until  the  determi- 
native for  deity  is  found  prefixed  to  such  a  name,  we  must 
look  elsewhere  for  an  explanation  of  the  form." 

It  remains  to  notice  one  other  view,  viz.  that  Moses  de- 
rived his  religious  belief,  or  at  any  rate  the  Name  of  Qod, 
from  the  Midianites.  That  is  inherently  improbable,  for 
there  is  nothing  whatever  to  suggest  that  any  deity  bear- 
ing this  name  was  ever  worshiped  in  Midian.  It  is  flatly 
contradicted  by  Bx.  iii.  and  vi.,  and  also  by  the  whole  Old 
Testament  view  that  the  Qod  of  Moses  was  the  Qod  of  the 
patriarchs.  Textual  criticism  now  furnishes  new  facts.  In 
Ex,  xviii,  1  ("  Now  Jethro  .  ,  .  heard  of  all  that  God  had 
done  for  Moses,  and  for  Israel  his  people,"  B.  V.)  the  LXX 
reads,  '  Jethro  heard  what  xcfuo?  'lo-pat^A,  had  done  for  hia 
people.'  The  variants  recorded  in  Brooke  and  McIiCan's 
edition  are  insignificant: — pr  o  y.  idi  Cyr-cod:  om  z:  -|- 
oS^a,.  Of  these,  j's  reading  is  probably  due  to  an  attempt 
to  make  sense  of  the  text ;  but,  if  original,  it  represents  a 
Hebrew  '  the  baal  of  Israel.'  The  general  Qreek  reading 
when  retranslated  gives  YHWH  Israel,  which  ia  just  as 
impossible  as  Thomas  Israel  would  be  in  English.  The  or- 
iginal probably  had  '  the  baal  of  Israel,'  and  the  LXX  and 
M,  T,  offer  alternative  corrections.  If  in  the  eyes  of  Jethro 
the  Qod  of  Moses  was  the  baal  of  Israd,  it  is  obvious  that 
the  Name  and  worship  were  not  derived  from  Midianite 
sources.  That  hypothesis  may  therefore  be  dismissed  as 
worthless. 

'American  Journal  of  Theology,  vol.  xxH,  pp.  47-50  (No.  1,  Jan. 
1918). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moaes 


It  is  inanifeat  that,  in  order  to  understand  the  religion 
of  Israel,  we  mast  get  as  close  as  posaible  to  the  orig- 
inal text  pt  the  Old  Testament.  Some  work  has  already 
been  done  on  Qenesis  and  a  little  on  the  later  books,  but 
even  in  the  best  part  of  the  field  ve  are  still  far  from 
finality. 

The  phenomena  of  the  text  of  Oeneais  in  respect  of  the 
Divine  appellations  merely  form  part  of  a  larger  problem 
—  that  of  the  Divine  appeUations  throughout  the  Old  Tes- 
tament —  which  in  torn  is  only  a  section  of  the  great  text- 
ual problem  of  the  Old  Testament.  The  best  text  we  can 
now  hope  to  recover  will  be  attainable  only  when  the  whole 
of  the  available  material  has  been  published  and  thor- 
oughly discussed,  but  it  is  necessary  to  go  as  far  as  we  can 
towards  solving  provisionally  the  difficulties  that  arise  on 
the  facts  already  before  us.  No  donbt  some  of  the  per- 
plexities are  dne  to  glossing,  mistakes  in  resolving  real 
or  supposed  abbreviations,  confusions  between  tbe  Tetra- 
grammaton  and  Adonai,  owing  to  the  identity  of  pronun- 
ciation, and  erroneous  emendations  of  passages  that  were 
thonght  to  be  corrupt.  Bat  the  chief  cause  lay  elsewhere. 
The  Old  Testament  has  been  deliberately  edited  by  men 
whose  minds  were  dominated  by  Biblical  texts  and  theo- 
logical views.  In  many  of  the  books  the  chief  stumbling- 
block  was  the  presence  of  the  word  "  Baal,"  to  which  ob- 
jection was  taken  later  on  account  of  the  interpretation 
placed  on  passages  like  Hos.  ii.  16  f.'  In  fairness,  however, 
to  the  editors,  we  must  remember  that  something  like  their 
work  was  absolutely  necessary  if  monotheism  was  to  be 
safeguarded. 

The  time  is  now  ripe  for  advancing  further  along  what 
experience  has  shown  to  be  the  right  road,  and  we  can 

■Formerly  I  hcBltated  In  8ome  passages  between  Baal  and 
Adon.  I  now  think  that  adon  was  not  removed,  for  it  appears 
actually  to  have  been  iruerteA  In  place  of  older  titles  tbat  were 
deeraed  objectionable,  e.g.  In  Deut  Is.  26  (see  Dabse,  op.  dt„  vol. 
t.  p.  12,  and  infra) ;  and  tbat  would  not  have  occurred  hod  this 
word  been  obnoxfous  to  the  editors.  Compare  also  the  use  of 
Adonai. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


342  Bibliotlieca  Sacra  [July, 

make  some  additional  ase  of  our  archaeological,  religiona, 
and  textual  materials.^ 

The  word  "  Baal "  seems  to  have  been  extremely  com- 
mon at  the  time  of  Moses.  A  journal  of  an  Egyptian  fron- 
tier official  dated  in  the  third  year  of  Memeptah  (i^ 
in  the  regnal  year  .immediately  following  that  in  which 
the  Exodus  took  place)  gives  ns  the  following: — "There 
went  up  the  servant  of  Baal,"  "  The  chief  of  Tyre,  Baalat- 
Bem^,"  "  Meth-det,  son  of  Bhem-Baal."  Yet  the  English 
translation  of  the  whole  journal  occupies  scarcely  more 
than  a  page  of  Breasted's  "Ancient  Records"  {vol.  ill.  pp. 
271  f.).  Working  back,  we  find  that  names  compoonded 
with  Baal,  e.g.  Amur-Baalu,  occur  in  the  Amama  tablets, 
and  the  Baalat  of  Gnbla  is  often  mentioned.  Coming  down 
to  the  finds  at  Samaria,  we  meet  with  the  names  Baala, 
Baalzamar,  Baalisakar,  Baal-Meoni,  Abibaal,  and  Heri- 
baal  on  ostraca.*  Bealiah  occurs  as  a  Jewish  name  in 
Babylonia  in  the  time  of  Darius  II.  {42t-404  b.c.).*  The 
Elephantine  papyri  and  ostraca  contain  a  number  of  names 
compounded  with  Baal,  but  Sachau  (p.  77)  states  that  none 
of  them  occurs  in  any  papyrus  that  is  certainly  Jewish. 

Bo  much  for  the  additional  facts  revealed  by  archsolt^y. 
Xow  who  or  what  was  baal?* 

In  itself  "  baal "  is  an  absolutely  harmless  word,  mean- 

■  On  some  of  the  mattere  here  treated  Bee  now  further  H.  Greas- 
mann,  Hadad  uad  Baal  nach  den  Amarnabriefen  und  nach  ftgrPt- 
Ischen  Texten  In  Abbandlungen  zur  semltlechen  RellglonBkunde 
usd  SpracbwtasenBcbaft  Wolf  Wllhelm  Orafen  von  Baudlssln  .  .  . 
aberrelcht  [1918],  pp.  191-216.  Thla  volume  became  available  In 
London  too  late  for  use  In  the  present  dlacuaalon. 

'D.  O.  Lfon.  Harvard  Theological  Review,  vol.  Iv,  (1911>  p. 
141;  S.  R.  Driver,  Paleettne  Exploration  Fund  Quarterly  State- 
ment (1911),  pp.  S2r. 

*S.  Dalcfaes,  op.  dt.,  p.  17.  These  facts  show  that  Professor 
L.  B.  Paton  was  unfortunate  In  asserting  (Encyclopedia  of  Re- 
ligion and  Ethics,  vol.  11,  [1909]  p.  291)  that  "No  names  of  this 
type  are  found  after  the  time  of  David,"  and  In  some  of  the  Infer- 
ences he  draws.  The  revelations  of  the  spade  habitually  damage 
the  reputations  of  modem  Orientalists. 

•At  this  point  It  Is  necessary  to  utter  a  word  of  warning  for 
English  readers.    The  second  volume  of  the  Encyclopiedla  of  Re- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Keligion  of  Moses  343 

ing  lord,  m&Bter,  owner.  It  is  commonly  ased  of  men  in 
various  good  eenaes^  aiich  as  master  of  a  horse,  owner  of 
an  ox,  hasband  of  a  wife,  and  can  also  express  different 
kinds  of  relationship.  Thus  '  baal  of  dreams '  is  the  equiv- 
alent of  the  Elnglish  "  dreamer."  The  usage  of  the  word  is 
singularly  flexible.  It  was  also  applied  to  supernatural 
llglon  and  Ethlca  edited  b7  Or.  J.  Haetinge,  which  appeared  in 
1609,  contAlnB  a  long  article  (pp.  283-298).  by  ProfeaBor  Lewie 
Bayles  Paton,  which  gives  a  great  deal  of  Information  and  might 
naturally  be  consulted  on  tbe  subject.  It  must,  however,  only  be 
used  with  reserve,  becauee  of  an  unlucky  mistake  In  the  Hebrew 
and  Old  Testament  field  which  vitiates  the  discussion.  We  read 
(p.  284a):  "In  Bab-Assyr.  the  worshlppv  addresees  his  god  as 
BtH,  •  my  lord.'  or  BtUt,  '  my  lady  *;  but  this  is  not  found  In  the 
other  dialects,  except  where  there  Is  direct  borrowing  frnn  tbe 
Babylonian.  ...  It  is  noteworthy,  however,  that,  while  the  wor- 
shipper does  not  speak  of  tbe  god  as  '  my  ba'al,'  he  may  call  him- 
self '  slave  of  tbe  ba'ai.' "  Now  that  Is  exactly  what  the  worshiper 
did  do  In  Hebrew.  Hosea  ii.  16  is  perfectly  explicit  on  tbe  point: 
"And  tt  shall  be  at  that  d^,  saith  tbe  Low,  thiU  thou  shalt  call 
me  Ishl;  and  shalt  call  me  no  more  Baall."  That  means  that 
Baall,  my  baaJ,  was  commonly  used  in  Israel  (compare  lea.  llv. 
6;  Jer.  xxxl.  32).  Professor  Paton's  attitude  Is  the  more  curious 
because  later  In  tbe  article  (p.  292a)  he  actually  refers  to  the 
Hosea  pasBsge,  and  (p.  292b)  even  points  to  some  of  the  textual 
matilaUons  that  were  carried  through  In  order  to  purge  '  the  Old 
Testament  of  this  word.'  This,  of  course,  disposes  of  his  state- 
m^it  (284a) :  "  Corresponding  to  the  original  usage  which  lim- 
ited the  name  Ba'al  to  owners  of  things,  tbe  be'atim  are  elsewhere 
uniformly  regarded  as  proprietors  of  objects  and  places,  not  as 
owners  of  persons.  Lords  of  tribes  or  of  ladtvlduals  are  .  .  .  never 
bCaUm.  One  never  meets  Ba'al-Iiraet,  Ba'aUMoab,  Ba'al-AnMium" 
As  the  word  has  been  Bystematically  removed  from  the  Old  Tes- 
tament text,  we  cannot  be  sure  whether  it  was  used  of  Moab  and 
Amnion  or  not  It  is  Quite  possible  that  It  stood  originally  in  some 
places  where  we  now  read  'abomination'  or  some  other  word 
(e.g.  1  Kings  xl.  5,  7;  see  BS,  July,  1917.  pp.  479tt.).  It  — or 
rather  the  feminine  Baalah—  seems,  however,  to  have  been  used 
of  Jadah  (see  the  names  la  2  Sam.  vl.  2  [Klttel,  BIblla  Hebralca, 
ad  loc]  compared  with  1  CSkron.  xill.  6);  and  In  oonnection  with 
Benjamin  we  shonld  restore  '  hie  Baal '  In  Deut.  zxxili.  12  (see  BS, 
April,  1918,  pp.  239 If.).  In  Ex.  xviii.  1  we  have  seen  that  the  read- 
ings are  explicable  on  the  view  that  Baal  of  Israel  has  been  de- 
liberately mutilated;  and  there  is  strong  reason  for  holding  that 
the  expression  Baal  of  Hosts  was  frequent. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


344  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [J«ly» 

beings,  and  bere  its  flexibility  makes  it  extremely  difflcolt 
always  to  be  sare  wbat  is  meant.  Perhaps  it  will  be  saffl- 
cient  to  refer  to  three  matters: — (1)  All  kinds  of  spirits 
supposed  to  be  connected  with  wells,  trees,  etc.,  were  called 
baals;  (2)  so  were  a  nnmber  of  local  deities,  such  as  the 
Baals  of  particular  towns;  and  (3)  baal  is  also  used  for 
one  deity  who  was  Baal  par  excellence,  Hadad,  the  Adda 
of  the  Amama  letters.  In  108.  9,^  we  find  Bib-addi  of 
Gubla  comparing  the  king  to  Addu  and  the  son  in  the 
heaTen;  in  147.  14,  149.  7,  we  have  similar  compansona 
by  Abi-Milki  of  Tyre;  and  in  169.  7,  by  Aziru  prince  of 
Amurru.  In  62.  4  the  Pharaoh  is  called  'my  lord  (bel), 
my  Addn'  by  Akizzi  of  B^tna.  M.  J.  Lagrange  (fitudes 
sur  les  BeligioDS  S4mitiquee  [2d  ed.  1905],  pp.  91,  93),  fol- 
lowing Hommel  and  Knudtzon,  thinks  that  in  many  cases 
where  we  find  the  name  written  ideographicaUy  in  proper 
names  it  was  actually  read  as  baal.  Be  this  as  it  may, 
Hadad  seems  to  have  been  a  baal  whose  worship  was  not 
confined  to  any  particular  locality,  to  have  been  associated 
with  the  heavens,  and  to  have  been  often  called  Baal  Sha- 
mem,  the  baal  of  heav^i. 

For  a  long  time  the  use  of  the  word  "  baal "  in  connec- 
tion with  Israel's  Qod  was  regarded  as  just  as  natural  and 
harmless  as  its  use  of  any  other  deity.  Bealiah,  '  Yah  is 
my  Baal  [Lord],'  is  found  as  a  proper  name  (1  Chron.  xii. 
6;  Baiches,  op.  cit.),  just  as  is  Elijah,  'Yah  is  my  El 
[God].'  But  later  a  change  set  in,  and  the  word,  when 
used  as  a  designation  of  Qod,  was  sedulously  removed  from 
the  Old  Testament  books.  Various  devices  were  adopted,  — 
mutilation  of  the  word  itself,  substitution  of  another  ex- 
pression, and  total  excision  of  an  offending  phrase,  all  be- 
ing practiced.'  Sometimes  the  divergences  of  parallel  texts  or 

'I  cite  by  J.  A.  Knudtzon's  Die  El-Amarna  Tafeln  (1916). 

■  For  instances,  Bee  tlie  artlclea  cited  in  footnote  1,  p.  339,  tupra. 
Thus  Abab'B  (our  hundred  Baal  prophetB  have  been  converted  by 
editors  Into  prophetB  at  terael'fl  God,  thereby  depriving  the  nar- 
rative of  all  sense  <1  KlngB  xxil.;  2  Chron.  zvUl.);  the  men  of 
Sodom  have  been  made  to  sin  before  the  Lobo,  of  Whom  they 
knew  nothing,  inetead  of  before  the  Baal,  etc. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moaea  345 

of  ancient  veraions  show  that  different  editors  have  worked 
on  different  principles,  and  enable  us  to  go  some  way 
towards  restoring  the  original.  In  other  passages  consid- 
erations of  B^ise  or  soond  come  to  our  assistance. 

If,  now,  we  read  the  patriarchal  history  in  the  knowl- 
edge that  we  can  place  no  reliance  on  the  Massoretic 
designations  of  the  supernatural  beings,  we  shall  not  come 
to  the  conclusion  that  the  background  is  mouotheistic. 
There  is  undoubtedly  one  supernatural  Being  Who  stands 
in  a  special  relation  to  the  patriarchs,  and  He  has  messen- 
gers or  angels  who  are  also  supernatural;  though  their 
existence  is,  of  course,  entirely  compatible  with  monothe- 
ism. But  apart  from  the  strange  gods  whose  worship  Jacob 
forbids  in  a  particular  locality  (Oen.  xzxr.  2),  though  he 
had  apparently  not  reprobated  it  elsewhere,  there  are  two 
classes  of  other  beings.  In  Qen,  xxxii.  24  Jacob  wrestles 
with  a  man  according  to  most  texts,  but  an  angel  accord- 
ing to  D,  supported  by  Justin  (and  Theodoret).  Whether 
on  the  textual  question  we  regard  '  man '  as  original,  or 
take  it  as  a  substitution  for  Baal  made  on  the  basis  of  the 
iahi  (my  man)  of  Hosea's  famous  text  (ii.  18  f.),  it  is  clear 
that  the  narrative  regards  Jacob's  opponent  as  supernat- 
ural. In  Gen.  xvi.  we  again  find  a  baal  or  el  (BS,  Jan.  1915, 
pp.  103  f.).  Another  class  of  supernatural  beings  is  fur- 
nished by  Leah's  invocation  of  the  Syrian  deity  Gad  (Oen. 
xxxi.  11)  and  passages  like  Qen.  xiv,,  where  we  find  a  deity 
who  in  the  original  text  was  called  El  Eh/on.  The  Tetra- 
grammaton  in  verse  22  is  a  late  insertion,  and  we  may 
doubt  whether  in  the  patriarchal  age  this  god  was  iden- 
tified with  the  God  of  Israel,  Who,  however,  later  absorbed 
his  name 

The  textual  phenomena  of  the  last  four  books  of  the 
Pentateuch  res^nble  those  with  which  we  meet  in  Genesis. 
Pending  the  publication  of  Dahse's  full  materials,  it  is  un- 
necessary to  deal  with  the  bulk  of  the  passages,  but  I  have 
observed  that  in  some  the  results  that  can  be  obtained  are 
material  to  the  present  study.  In  Deut.  vi.  4  the  Hebrew 
gives : — '  Hear,  0  Israel,  the  Loan  our  God  the  Loan  one.' 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


346  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [J«ly, 

To  any  thinking  man  it  will  seem  most  improbable  that 
an  aQtbor,  of  the  ability  of  the  writer  of  this  passage, 
having  an  extremely  important  announcement  to  make, 
shonld  formulate  it  in  langnage  that  is  SD8ceptibl«  of  four 
different  meanings,  none  of  them  good.  If  he  wished  to 
say  either  that  '  the  Lord,  our  God,  is  one '  or  *  the  Lord 
oar  Qod  is  the  only  Qod,'  it  was  open  to  him  to  do  so.  Bnt 
the  B.  V.  adopts  as  its  text  "  the  Lord,  oar  God,  Is  one 
Lord."  That  makes  exactly  the  same  sort  of  impression 
as  if  one  shoald  say  "  My  friend  Thomas  is  one  Thomas," 
for  the  Tetragrammaton  is  just  as  purely  a  personal  name 
as  is  Thomas.  The  textual  material  increases  our  embar- 
rassments. The  Nash  papyrus,  our  most  ancient  Hebrew 
witness,  adds  Kin  ■  he  is,'  which  rules  out  the  other  trans- 
lations and  leaves  the  meaningless  B.  V.  in  sole  possession 
of  the  field.  If  the  word  is  original,  why  was  it  dropped 
in  M.  T.?  If  it  was  not,  how  came  so  nonsensical  an  inter- 
pretation to  arise?  The  great  t>ody  of  Septuagintal  author- 
ities support  the  Nash  papyrus,  a  few  Fathers  have  '  God ' 
for  the  second  Lord,  and  n.  Boh,  "Eth",  Fal^,  with  some 
patristic  anthorities,  read  '  the  Lord,  our  God,  is  one,' 
omitting  the  second  '  Lord.'  This  would  be  excellent,  but 
for  the  fact  that  it  could  not  have  given  rise  to  the  car- 
rent  texts,  and  is  therefore  not  original.  Yet  there  is  a 
very  simple  solution.  '  Hear,  O  Israd,  the  Lord  our  God 
is  one  baal '  (ton  irw  Vn)  would  give  a  good  s^ise  and 
explain  all  the  readings.  The  removal  of  the  word  by  later 
editors  gave  rise  to  alternative  mutilationB,  ending  in  non- 
sense. In  days  when  baal  was  a  synonym  for  God,  the 
original  sentence  meant  '  The  Lord  our  God  is  one  God.' 

In  the  overwhelming  majority  of  cases  the  removal  of 
baal  and  the  substitution  of  some  other  word  has  made  no 
substantial  difference.  In  others  the  clear  sense  of  the 
passage  has  overcome  philol<^,  and  most  readers  have 
continued  to  understand  it  in  the  way  originally  intended 
by  the  author,  in  spite  of  verbal  changes.  For  instance, 
where  in  a  law  baalim  was  altered  to  Elohim,  the  A.  V. 
ri^tly  rendered  "  judges,"  for  in  the  old  days  justice  was 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moaes  347 

dispensed  by  the  Baalim  {citizens,  elders)  of  the  place.* 
WheH  the  word  was  removed,  Elohim  was  substituted, 
donbtlees  under  the  influence  of  Deut.  i.  17,  "  for  judg- 
ment belongs  to  Blohim,"  but  the  common  sense  of  the 
people  was  not  led  astray,  and  it  was  understood  that  the 
real  meaning  was  '  judges,'  not  '  God.' 

In  some  passages,  however,  the  change  affected  the  sense 
in  a  way  that  could  not  easily  be  remedied.  In  Ex.  viii. 
18  (E.  V.  22),  in  the  light  of  my  present  knowledge,  I  re- 
gard the  Beptuagiutal  texts  *  as  being  due  to  an  original 
Hebrew,  '  shall  know  that  I,  the  Loed,  am  baal  of  all  the 
earth.'  *  Such  an  expression  is  unquestionably  material  to 
our  conception  of  the  religion  of  Moses.*  On  the  other 
hand,  if  baal  has  been  altered  into  the  Tetragramma- 
ton,  much  may  have  been  ascribed  to  Israel's  Ood  that 
was  not  properly  His.  The  golden  calf  affords  a  remark- 
able illustration.  If  Aaron  said  "a  feast  of  the  Lord  to- 
morrow" (Ex,  xxxii.  5),  it  was  either  identified  or  con- 
nected with  Him.  But  if  the  true  reading  be  that  of  the 
LXX,  '  a  feast  of  the  lord  [baal]  to-morrow,'  then  the  calf 
is  the  calf  of  Hadad."    Again,  Ex.  Iv.  24-26  is  clearly  a 

>  See  BS,  April,  1919,  pp.  210  IT. 

'See  BS.  Jan.  191G,  p.  136. 

■It  aeems  quite  likely  that  the  expresEioD  "shall  know  that  I 
am  the  Lobd  "  is  never  original  In  Exodui,  where  we  are  dealing 
with  a  newl7  revealed  name  with  no  assoclatiODB. 

'I  am  of  coarse  aware  that  the  evolutionary  school  deliberately 
reject  all  these  monotheistic  ezpreBsions  as  late  additions  to  the 
text  of  their  earlier  documents.  Their  action  Is  based  on  the 
a  priori  view  that  monotheism  is  late,  which  I  have  refuted  In  the 
BS  for  Oct.  1907  (as  stated  at  the  beginning  of  the  present  discus- 
sion). Ab  we  have  seen,  monotheism  was,  in  fact,  much  older  than 
Uoses  (tupro,  pp.  323-333). 

*UCX  rovnipuu,  except  the  Syro-Hexaplar,  which  renders  Dom- 
ino, correctly  representing  M.  T.  I  must  not  be  understood  as  say- 
ing that  in  the  best  text  ice  can  now  restore  of  the  Septuaglntal 
Pentateuch  1  nvxM  with  the  article,  as  opposed  to  mpm  without 
the  article,  never  represents  the  name  of  Ood;  but  the  usage  with- 
out the  article  for  this  purpose  Is  so  preponderant,  that  I  suspect 
that  originally  the  translators  always  employed  It  to  represent  tho 
Tetragrammaton.  Like  the  Hebrew,  the  Qreek  has  been  so  much 
eut  about  to  free  it  from  what  was  deemed  objectionable  (witness 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  8«8.    < 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


348  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

story  of  some  baal  who  differed  essentially  from  Israel's 
God.  No  Hebrew  historian  coold  possibly  have  repro- 
Bcnted  his  God  as  trying  to  kill  a  man  and  tailing  in  the 
attempt.  This  baal  belongs  to  the  same  class  aa  Hagar's 
interlocutor  and  the  being  who  wrestled  with  Jacob. 

In  Nnm.  xiv.  9  we  meet  the  oniutelligible  expression 
"their  shadow  (dW>  has  departed,"  etc.  Most  Septna- 
gintal  texts  have  o  xatpot  but  the  Armenian  read  Dominut 
and  NgnklPb  (mg)  oOT  =  ^B3n.  *  the  baal.'  For  our  pres- 
ent purpose  it  is  worth  noticing  that  the  expression  seems 
to  have  been  '  the  baal,'  not '  their  baal.'  The  narrator  here 
probably  adopts  the  term  commonly  used  by  the  natives 
themselves,  without  thereby  indicating  that  he  necessarily 
regarded  *  the  baal '  as  identical  with  Israel's  baal. 

Other  readings  throw  light  on  our  probl«n.  In  Nam. 
xvi.  22,  M.  T.  has  ' God,  god  of  spirits  of  all  flesh,'  bntthe 
LXX  clearly  read  '  and  of  all  flesh  "  ( 1  for  H  Similarly 
in  zxvii.  16  the  LXX  seems  to  have  found  'Lord,  God  of 
spirits  and  of  all  flesh.'  Those  readings  make  the  Lobd 
God  of  the  supernatural  world  as  well  as  of  mankind  and 
the  whole  animal  kingdom. 

Deuteronomy  ix.  26  should  perhaps  be  placed  by  the 
side  of  these.  Dahse  (op.  cit.)  has  carefully  distingoished 
seven  Greek  readings.  Three  of  these  contain  the  phrase 
'  king  of  the  gods,'  which  is  clearly  the  original.  The  He- 
brew elohim  is,  however,  used  of  supernatural  beings  gen- 
erally ;  so  that  king  of  the  gods  does  not  necessarily  mean 
what  it  would  in  the  mouth  of  an  ancient  Greek.  It  need 
not  mean  more  than  the  "  God  of  gods  "  of  x.  17,  if  that 
phrase  be  interpreted  not  as  a  simple  superlative,  but  in 
tbe  nine  readlnge  In  Josh.  vt.  IT)  that  It  1b  not  safe,  to  bulltl  much 
on  the  presence  or  absence  of  the  article.  On  the  bull  of  Hadad, 
cp.  M.  J.  Lagrange,  op.  cit.,  p.  93.  He  holds  that  Hadad  was  Baal 
Shamem,  and  that  his  attributes  were  sufSclentlr  like  those  of  the 
Qod  of  Israel  to  have  led  to  a  mixture  of  worship  and  the  adora- 
tion of  the  latter  under  tbe  Image  of  a  bull.  That  would  explain 
the  practice  of  the  Northern  Kingdom  and  Illuminate  Aaron's  action. 
'  Divergencies  In  tbe  readlnge  of  the  Septuaglntal  authorltlea 
that  do  not  affect  the  point  at  issue  are  disregarded. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moses  349 

its  literal  sense;  >  bat  it  doee  point  to  a  belief  in  tlie  exist- 
ence of  other  supernatural  beings  over  wtiom  Qod  reigns 
supreme. 

In  Deut.  xxzii.  S  f .  the  LXX  reproduces  tlie  same  idea. 
Its  Hebrew  appears  to  have  read; — 

8  'When  Blyoa  gave  to  the  nations  tbeir  Inheritance, 
When  He  separated  the  children  of  men, 

He  set  tha  borders  of  the  peoples 
According  to  the  sons  [LXX  angels]  of  EL 

9  For  the  portion  of  the  Lobd  1b  hla  people  Jacob, 
The  lot  of  bis  Inheritance  is  Israel.' 

Yet  this  was  felt  to  be  perfectly  consistent  with  saying 
(ver.  39) :  "  See  now  that  I,  even  I,  am  he,  and  there  is 
no  god  with  me." 


We  may  now  attempt  a  synthesis  of  the  facts  bearing 
apon  our  problem. 

The  ancestors  of  the  Israelites  dwelt  of  old  time  beyond 
the  Biver  and  they  served  other  gods  (Josh.  xxiv.  2,  14  f.). 
Abraham  had  communion  with  a  God  of  heaven  with  Whom 
he  felt  himself  to  stand  in  a  special  relation.  But  His  name 
was  certainly  not  revealed  to  the  patriarchs  and  was  prob- 
ably unknown.  There  is  no  reason  to  suppose  either  that 
he  believed  that  God  to  be  the  sole  deity  or  that  he  re- 
frained from  worshiping  other  gods.  El  Elyon  of  Jeru- 
salem (Gen.  xiv.),  the  I>eing  who  appeared  to  Hagar  (Gen. 
xvi.),  El  01am  (Gen.  xxi,  33),'  were  not  necessarily  iden- 
tified in  Abraham's  mind  with  the  Baal  whom  he  wor- 
shiped in  the  'place'  of  Shechem.  We  must  regard  the 
patriarclis  as  standing  on  the  common  Semitic  level,  be- 
lieving in  a  plurality  of  baals,  some  of  whom  we  should 

>  Cp.  Josh.  zxll.  22,  H.  T. 

'It  looks  as  ir.  In  an  ancestor  of  our  present  Hebrew,  'Israel' 
bad  been  written  above  the  line  or  In  the  margin,  and  bad  tb«i 
been  treated  as  a  correction  ot  tbe  '  el '  of  ver.  S. 

■ '  Tbelr '  was  unknown  to  D  and  Pbllo;  t  misplaces  '  the  name 
of  tbe  Lobd,'  wblcb  points  to  Its  being  an  addition.  It  Is  quite  possi- 
ble that  originally  El  Olam  was  a  local  numen. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


350  Bibliotheca  Hacra  [J»ily> 

term  gods  while  others  might  be  regarded  as  graiies  or 
local  spirits  that  would  hardly  be  dignified  with  such  a 
title.  While  I  am  seldom  able  to  follow  Eerdmans  in  mat> 
ters  of  detail,  I  think  that  he  showed  true  insight  when  he 
wrote  the  following  sentences :  "  The  exegesis  of  Genesis 
teaches  us  in  my  opinion  that  a  background  of  polytheistic 
traditions  lies  behind  our  text.  The  monotheistic  sciibes 
read  these  traditions  in  a  monotheistic  sense,  and  only  a 
few  traces  are  now  preserved  which  show  us  the  original 
meaning  of  the  narrative.  These  traditions  are  not  the 
product  of  a  pre-exUic  or  postexilic  school,  but  old  popular 
traditions  "  (Die  Komposition  der  Genesis  [1908],  pp.  1  f.). 
Scientific  textual  criticism,  working  hand  in  hand  with 
archaeological  study  and  comparative  religion,  enables  us 
to  go  some  way  towards  recovering  the  original  spirit  of 
the  narratives. 

As  already  indicated,  we  have  no  means  of  judging  how 
far  Abraham  identified  the  Ood  Who  appeared  to  him  with 
many  of  the  local  baals  worshiped  in  Canaan,  just  as  we 
are  ignorant  of  how  far  the  Amorites  themselves  identi- 
fied the  baal  of  one  city  with  the  baal  of  the  next.  It  is 
most  probable  that  in  those  ages  the  bulk  of  the  people 
would  have  been  quite  unable  to  give  a  clear,  consistent 
acconut  of  their  beliefs,  and  we  may  reasonably  suppose 
that  the  leaders  of  the  religious  thought  of  the  age  would 
often  have  regarded  as  local  cults  of  the  same  deity  what 
to  the  majority  of  the  populace  were  cults  of  different 
gods.  One  point,  however,  does  suggest  itself.  The  in- 
sistence upon  Sbechem  as  the  scene  of  a  great  covenant 
between  Gk>d  and  Israel  (Deut.  xi.  29  f. ;  iivii.  8  f. ;  Josh, 
xxiv.;  see  BS,  Oct.  1916,  pp.  609  f.)  and  Gen.  ixxiii.  20 
(Bl  Elohe  Israel)  taken  in  conjunction  with  Gen.  lii.  6f., 
make  it  likely  that  the  God  of  Abraham  was  identified 
with  a  Baal  worshiped  at  Shechem,  while  Gen.  xxiv.  shows 
that  He  was  r^arded  as  the  God  of  heaven.  Jacob  cer- 
tainly identified  Him  with  a  God  Who  appeared  to  him 
in  Bethd  (Gen.  xxviii.  11-22,  etc.),  and  In  the  expression 
"  this  is  the  gate  of  heaven  "  (xxviii  17)  we  should  possi- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moses  351 

bly  see  forther  evidence  of  the  identification  with  the  God 
of  Heaven.  Yet  there  is  not  the  amalleat  reason  for  re- 
garding this  patriarch  as  a  monotheist  or  even  a  monol- 
ater.  He  certainly  canoot  have  sacrificed  to  the  God  of 
his  fathers  when  in  Laban's  service;  for,  luUike  Naaman 
at  a  later  date  (2  Kings  v.  17),  he  did  not  travel  with  two 
mules'  borden  of  earth,  which  wonld  have  given  him  the 
BoU  on  which  alone,  according  to  the  ideas  of  those  days, 
sacrifice  could  have  been  oEEered.  The  natural  Impression 
made  by  a  i^emsal  of  Gen.  zxzL  is  that  the  vision  it  nar- 
rates reinaugurated  a  relationship  which  had  lapsed  for 
some  years.  Laban  and  his  daughters  were  polytheiste. 
When  Leah  said,  "With  Gad"  (Gen.  xxx.  11),  she  was 
calling  on  a  Syrian  god  of  that  name;  and  the  story  of  the 
stolen  teraphim  (Gen.  xzxi.)  speaks  with  no  uncertain 
voice.  Jacob  became  squeamish  about  strange  gods  only 
when  he  approached  Bethel  (Gen.  xxzv.  1  ff.).  It  has  al- 
ready been  indicated  that  some  of  the  minor  supernatural 
personages  with  whom  we  meet  in  the  narrative,  such  as 
Jacob's  antagonist  at  Penuel,  should  not  be  idoitified  with 
the  God  of  the  patriarchs. 

The  people  who  went  down  into  Egypt,  therefore,  were 
polytheists  and  the  descendants  of  polytheists.  They  stood 
on  precisely  the  same  footing  as  the  contemporary  Amor- 
ites,  except  that  they  believed  that  a,  or  more  probably 
the,  God  of  heaven,  Who  had  been  worshiped  at  Shechem 
and  probably  Bethel  and  other  places,  had  appeared  to 
Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob,  and  entered  into  special  rela- 
tions with  them.  But  here  comes  a  very  important  point. 
Unlike  all  the  other  relationships  between  the  human  and 
the  Divine  with  which  we  meet  in  Semitic  religion  outside 
Israel,  this  was  conceived  as  a  voluntary  sworn  contract, 
called  a  covenant,  into  which  both  parties  had  entered. 
The  significance  of  this  is  very  great  indeed.  It  disposes 
of  all  theories  of  a  natural  or  local  relationship  between 
this  God  and  the  patriarchs.  "  The  God  before  whom  my 
fathers  Abraham  and  Isaac  did  walk,  the  Lord  which  hath 
fed  me  all  my  life  long  unto  this  day,  the  King  which  hath 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


862  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

redeemed  me  from  all  evil"  (Oen.  xlriti.  15 f.),  asenmed 
this  positioD  in  the  eyes  of  the  patriarchs  through  revela- 
tion  direct  and  unmistakable,  taking  a  form  which  delib- 
erately shot  ont  all  other  possibilities  of  interpretation. 
But  as  yet  His  vorship  is  not  exclaeive.  Save  within  a 
very  limited  territory  (Gten.  uxv.  2  ff.),  He  is  not  a  jeal- 
ons  Gtod,  There  is  no  suggestion  anywhere  that  polythe- 
ism was  untme  or  undesirable  (except  as  indicated  in  the 
last  sentence).  He  is  not  yet  conceived  as  the  Qod  of  gods. 

With  the  descent  into  Egypt  sacrificial  worship  of  the 
Qod  of  the  fathers  necessarily  ceased  (Ex.  viii.  22  [26]). 
The  people  naturally  and  inevitably  served  other  gods 
(Josh.  xxiv.  14;  Esek.  xz.  7f.).  There  was  a  memory  of 
the  Ood  of  the  fathers,  and  in  persecution  an  appeal  to 
Him ;  but  that  was  all.  The  Israelites  of  those  days  were 
polytheistic  and  idolatrous  to  the  core. 

The  first  intervention  of  Moses  on  behalf  of  his  brethren 
was  in  no  sense  religions.  His  patriotism  was  stirred  (Ex. 
ii.  11  H.),  and  there  is  as  yet  no  hint  of  what  he  was  to 
mean  in  the  spiritual  history  of  mankind.  That  first  ap- 
pears in  the  narrative  of  the  burning  bush.  He  receives 
a  revelation,  and  the  Being  Wbo  speaks  to  him  is  not  a 
god  of  Egypt  or  a  god  of  Gaanan,  not  a  god  of  Bene!  or 
of  Midian,  but  "  the  God  of  thy  father,  the  Qod  of  Abra- 
ham, the  Ood  of  Isaac,  and  the  Ood  of  Jacob  "  (Ex.  iii.  6). 
The  Name  is  revealed  to  him.  Philologists  have  debated 
as  to  the  etymology  of  the  word  THWH,  and  their  reeult 
has  been  negative.  They  have  failed  to  agree.  Naturally 
so.  It  is  not  put  forward  as  something  which  could 
have  a  definite  meaning  ascertainable  by  philolt^y.  It  Is 
called  "  this  glorious  and  fearful  name"  (Dent,  xxviii.  58), 
and  is  obviously  intended  to  transcend  etymol<^,  not 
limited  in  sense  to  any  single  aspect  of  the  Divine  nature, 
however  many  its  phonetic  analogies  might  suggest  The 
revelation  of  the  name  had  several  effects,  but  for  our  pres- 
ent purpose  we  need  consider  only  one.  A  personal  name 
at  once  emphasized  the  distinctness  of  this  Ood  from  all 
ottiers.     Uonotheism  is  not  yet  taught,  but  the  supreme 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moses  353 

power  over  the  creation  of  man  and  all  hU  faculties  is  dis- 
tinctly asserted  (iv.  11).  A  aopernatoral  being  meets 
Moses  at  the  lodging  place  and  seeks  to  kill  him.  The  at- 
tempt is,  hovever,  defeated  by  appropriate  means  (Ex.  iv. 
24-26).  Here  we  have  a  belief  in  a  genie  of  low-grade 
power  whom  we  should  not  term  a  god.  Then  comes  the 
narrative  of  the  happenings  in  Egypt.  Pharaoh  has  never 
heard  of  the  new  name  of  God,  and  proceeds  to  extremi- 
ties. This  is  followed  by  the  great  conflict  with  the  gods 
of  Egypt  in  which  monotheism  clearly  emerges  for  the  flrat 
time  in  the  narrative. 

That  conflict  shonld  be  studied  in  the  light  of  our  knowl- 
edge of  Egyptian  religion.  We  have  seen  that  monotheism 
had  sprung  into  being  in  that  country  some  one  hundred 
and  fifty  yeara  earlier.  While  it  had  failed,  the  attributes 
of  the  Aton  had  to  some  extent  been  ascribed  to  the  tri- 
umphant Amon.  It  was  inevitable  that  in  a  struggle 
against  Amon  they  should  be  assigned  to  the  victorious 
Ood  of  Israel.  And  so  we  read,  Ex.  viu.  6  (10) ,  "  that  thou 
mayest  know  that  there  is  no  other  save  the  Loan";*  viii. 
18  (22) , '  that  thou  mayest  know  that  I,  tbe  Lord,  am  baal 
of  all  the  earth ';  *  ix.  14  ft.,  "  that  thou  mayest  know  that 
there  is  none  like  me  in  all  the  earth  ...  to  shew  thee  my 
power,  and  that  my  name  may  be  declared  throughout  all 
the  earth  ";  ix.  29,  "  that  thou  mayest  know  that  the  earth 
is  the  Lord's."  The  monotheism  of  Israel  had  been  bom, 
but  how  could  it  be  saved  from  the  premature  fate  that  had 
befallen  the  religion  of  the  Aton  ?  How  was  the  Torah  of 
Mosee  to  win  a  brighter  future  than  the  "teaching"  of 
Akhenaton  ? 

To  some  extent  the  lawgiver's  problem  resembled  the 
Pharaoh's.  Both  had  to  deal  with  an  entirely  polytheistic 
people  and  with  the  same  false  gods.  But  here  the  like- 
ness ceases.  Neither  in  the  nature  of  his  deity,  nor  in  the 
historical   antecedents,   nor  in    the  circumstances  of  the 

*  So  most  SeptuaglDtal  texte,  but  It  la  possible  tbat  even  this  Is 
not  the  earliest  form  of  the  verse,  though  It  doubtless  gives  the 
orlgltial  sense  coirectlr. 

'  See  tupra,  p.  347, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


354  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

age,  nor  in  tbe  manifestations  of  Divine  power,  nor  even 
in  the  absence  of  vested  priestly  interests  in  other  gods, 
did  the  Egyptian  enjoy  the  advantages  of  the  Hebrew. 
Akhenaton  taught  a  speculative  belief  of  pantheistic  char- 
acter in  the  solar  disc ;  Moses,  on  the  other  hand,  e^ke  in 
the  name  of  a  personal  Qod  Who  lay  outside  creation,  Who 
was  known  to  the  people  in  their  earlier  history,  Who 
showed  Himself  easily  able  to  worst  the  gods  of  Egypt  in 
championing  their  cause,  and  Who  vouchsafed  miraculous 
signs  and  wonders  and  a  direct  revelation  of  His  will  to 
the  whole  nation.  It  would  be  unfair,  in  view  of  our  very 
limited  knowledge  of  the  faith  of  the  Atou,  to  dificnaa  the 
ethical  character  of  that  deity.  Bat  it  is  pertinent  to  ask, 
whether  anybody  supposes  that  Akhenaton  conld  have  en- 
acted any  law  forbidding  worship  of  other  gods  in  the 
Egypt  of  his  day.  If  that  question  be  answered  in  the 
negative  —  as  it  clearly  most  be  —  we  can  institute  no 
comparison  between  the  methods  of  the  two  men.  Akhen- 
aton failed;  but  he  failed  where  success  was  impossible; 
and  even  whUe  we  discern  the  flaws  in  his  beliefs  and  in 
his  methods,  he  is  entitled  to  onr  admiration  and  rever- 
ence for  a  spiritual  achievemoit  which  was  colossal  in  it- 
self and  helped  to  mold  the  future  of  monotheism  through- 
out the  world.  At  the  same  time  it  is  quite  possible  that 
Moses  learnt  some  lessons  from  his  failure. 

If  the  teaching  of  the  Egyptian  was  speculative,  the  He- 
brew devoted  more  attention  to  conduct  than  to  theory. 
The  task  of  converting  a  polytheistic  nation  to  monothe- 
ism is  essentially  practical,  and  the  means  must  necessarily 
vary  according  to  the  stage  of  reflection  and  intellectual 
culture  to  which  the  people  have  attained.  Monotheism 
in  those  days  was  contrary  to  substantially  all  human 
thought  and  experience.  To  an  ordinary  Israelite  of  the 
Mosaic  age,  an  assertion  that  the  gods  whom  the  Egyp- 
tians and  the  Amorites  worshiped  simply  did  not  exist, 
would  have  been  incredible,  if  not  meaningless.  Accord- 
ingly we  find  the  main  efforts  of  the  Pentateuch  devoted 
rather  to  the  enforcement  of  monotheistic  practice  than  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Beliffion  of  Moses  355 

the  discuBsioD  of  its  theory.  It  is  clearly  stated  that  "  all 
the  earth  ia  mine  "  (Ex.  xix.  5) ;  and  on  that  basis  a  core- 
Dant  Ib  made,  placing  the  people  in  the  position  of  a  king- 
dom of  priests.  Yet  the  legislation  is  devoted  to  the  prac- 
tical task  of  preventing  the  vorship  of  other  gods.  "  Thou 
Shalt  make  no  other  gods  before  me  "  (Ex.  xx.  3) ;  "  Thon 
shalt  not  make  unto  thee  a  graven  image,  nor  the  likeness 
of  any  form  that  is  in  heaven  above,  or  that  is  in  the  earth 
beneath,  or  that  is  in  the  water  nnder  the  earth :  thoa 
shalt  not  bow  down  thyself  imto  them,  nor  serve  them: 
for  I  the  Lord  thy  Ood  am  a  jealous  God,  visiting  the  in- 
iquity of  the  fathers  upon  the  children,  upon  the  third  and 
upon  the  fourth  generation  of  them  that  hate  me ;  and 
shewing  mercy  unto  thousands,  of  them  that  love  me  and 
keep  my  commandments"  (ver.  4-6) ;  "Ye  shall  not  make 
with  me  gods  of  silver,  or  gods  of  gold"  (ver.  23)^;  "He 
that  sacriflcetb  unto  other  gods  shall  be  devoted"'  (xxii. 
19  [20] ) ;  *  make  no  mention  of  the  name  of  other  gods,'  etc. 
(xxiii.  13) ;  "  Thou  shalt  not  bow  down  to  their  gods,  nor 
serve  them,  nor  do  after  their  works ;  but  thou  shalt  utterly 
overthrow  them,  and  break  in  pieces  their  pillars.  And  ye 
shall  serve  the  Lobd  your  God  "  (xxiii.  24  f  ) ;  "  Thou  shalt 
make  no  covenant  with  them,  nor  with  their  gods.  They 
shall  not  dwell  in  tby  land,  leat  they  make  thee  sin  against 
me :  for  if  thou  serve  their  gods,  it  will  surely  be  a  snare 
unto  thee"  (ver.  32f.).  Those  are  among  the  terms  of 
that  first  covenant.*  Nothing  is  here  predicated  as  to  the 
nature  or  power  of  those  other  gods:  attention  is  concen- 
trated on  the  translation  into  conduct. of  the  requirements 
of  monotheism.  The  difference  between  monotheism  and 
monolatry  looms  large  in  modem  textbooks;  but  as  a 
question  of  real  life  it  bad  no  existence  for  the  Hebrews 
of  the  Mosaic  age.  The  time  was  not  ripe  for  any  mlssion- 
'  For  the  test,  see  BS.  Oct.  1914,  pp.  621  f.,  footnote. 
*Thl8  appears  to  be  the  earliest  form  of  the  verae,  which  has 
Buffered  In  tranemlsslon. 

'It  aeema  unnecessary  to  quote  further  from  the  Pentateucbal 
leglBlatlon  on  this  point 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


356  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jnl^f 

ary  effort  to  other  peoples.  The  practical  task  was  to  win 
a  finn  hold  on  this  people  for  monotheistic  practice. 

Onr  information  snggests  that  even  this  was  quite  be- 
yond the  religious  powers  of  the  bulk  of  the  people.  The 
episode  of  the  golden  calf  illustrates  this.  Que  law  is  ex- 
pressly enacted  to  strike  at  the  worship  of  satyre  (Lev. 
xrii.  7) ;  another  makes  the  candid  admission  that  sacri- 
ficial conduct  was  regulated  by  the  principle  "  Every  man 
whatsoever  is  right  in  his  own  ^es  "  (Deut.  xii.  8).  Amos 
V.  26  is  too  difBcult  a  passage  to  be  of  much  value  as  evi- 
dence; but  Josh.  xziv.  23  speaks  of  "  the  strange  gods  which 
are  among  yon,"  and  Ezek.  zx.  is  very  emphatic  as  to  the 
idolatry  in  the  wilderness.  Even  the  wonders  of  the  Exo- 
dus and  the  wanderings,  even  Sinai,  could  not  avail  to 
stamp  monotheism  on  the  hearts  of  the  common  people. 

The  shaping  of  the  conduct  of  this  polytheistic,  idola- 
trous nation  was  the  immediate  problem,  not  the  formula- 
tion of  belief  and  thought ;  yet  no  absolute  hard-and-fast 
line  could  be  drawn  between  these  two  tasks  in  any  age. 
In  every  generation  there  are  thoughtful  minds,  though 
they  may  be  relatively  few,  and  some  provision  for  these 
was  a  necessity.  There  are  questionings  in  the  mind  of 
every  intelligent  monotheist,  at  some  period  of  his  devel- 
opment, concerning  the  relations  subsisting  between  the 
Ood  of  heaven  to  Whom  belonged  alt  the  earth  and  other 
supernatural  beings  on  the  one  hand,  and  the  heathen 
nations  on  the  other.  We  cannot  say  what  answer  Akhen- 
aton  made  to  them.  "  0  sole  Ood  whose  powers  no  other 
possesseth."  "  There  is  no  other  that  knoweth  thee,  save 
thy  son  Ikhnaton."  Did  no  other  supernatural  beings  ex- 
ist?  And  what  of  the  other  gods  and  their  worshipers? 
We  do  not  know  exactly  what  the  Pharaoh  would  have 
replied.  The  Pentateuch,  however,  provides  answers.  The 
God  of  Israel  is  not  merely  one  baal  (Deut.  vi.  4).  He  ia 
the  only  Deity  (Deut.  iv.  35,  39;  xxxii.  39).  He  too  is  God 
and  king  over  spirits  of  whatever  nature  Just  as  fully  as 
over  flesh  (Num.  xvi.  22;  xxvii.  16;  Deut.  ix.  26;  mpra,  pp. 
348 1.) .  And  whUe  there  is  none  beside  Him,  He  has  assigned 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Religion  of  Moses  357 

objects  of  worship  to  the  heathen  {I>eat.  iv.  19;  nxii.  8f. 
[LXX  text  cited  supra] ;  cp.  ixix.  25  [26] ) . 

In  these  passages  we  hare  the  only  possible  reconcilia- 
tion between  the  idea  of  a  single  beneficeot  God  and  that 
of  a  special  revelation  to  a  particular  people;  bat  so  far 
as  the  monotheistic  idea  is  concerned  they  carry  as  no  fur- 
ther than  Exodas.  In  all  alike  we  see  One,  All-powerfal 
Ood.  All  alike  recognize  the  ezlateDce  of  other  supernat- 
ural beings,  but  Numbers  tells  us  explicitly  the  relation 
between  Ood  and  those  beings,  while  Deuteronomy  also 
explains  the  position  of  those  nations  to  which  Ckhl  has 
not  revealed  Himself  directly.  Closely  regarded,  the  doc- 
trine of  the  Pentateuch  is  coherent  and  consistent.  Mono- 
theism, yes;  but  couched  in  a  form  that  strives  to  regulate 
the  conduct  of  the  most  ignorant  and  least  reflective  while 
presenting  nnobtmaively  the  deeper  doctrine  that  was 
essential  for  thoughtful  minds.  And  thus  monotheism  is 
consistently  made  the  basis  of  special  obligation  on  the 
part  of  the  people.  The  religion  of  Moses  was  a  religion 
of  duties  far  more  than  of  rights.  "  Ton  only  hare  I  known 
of  all  the  families  of  the  earth :  therefore  I  will  visit  upon 
yon  all  yonr  iniquities."  The  formulation  is  by  Amos  (iii. 
2),  bttt  the  thought  is  that  of  the  covenants.  The  Posses- 
sor of  all  the  earth  selects  a  kingdom  of  priests  and  a  holy 
nation,  and  promises  certain  benefits;  hut  in  return  He 
impoaes,  and  the  people  accept,  obligations  both  national 
and  individual  that  touch  human  life  at  every  point.  One 
supreme  God  and  a  chosen  people  of  revelation  —  chosen 
for  duty  and  service  —  that  is  the  doctrine.  How  different 
from  the  conception  of  Akhenaton ! 

Prom  the  outset  it  was  obvious  that  many  centuries 
of  no  common  discipline  would  be  necessary  before  these 
thoughts  would  really  dominate  the  national  soul,  to  the 
exclusion  of  polytheism  and  idolatry.  To  the  exponents 
of  the  a  priori  method  who  are  satisfied  that  Moses  could 
not  have  been  a  monotheist,  because,  in  the  teetb  of  the 
historical  evidence  to  the  contrary,  they  have  laid  down 
the  dogma  that  monotheism  was  not  invented  till  many 


dlyGOOt^lC 


368  Bibliotheca  Sacra 

centuries  later,  it  seeme  eqoall;  impossible  that  the  law- 
giver should  have  prophesied  the  ExUe.  Yet  this  attitude 
is  wholly  imscientific.  Bationalism  masqnerading  as  sci- 
ence may  seek  to  mutilate  the  evidence  in  order  to  force 
it  into  the  Procmsteao  bed  of  some  evolutionary  doctrine. 
But  true  science  does  not  start  from  a  priori  views  or  as- 
sert at  the  outset  that  the  religion  of  Israel  must  have 
been  a  religion  fundamentally  resembling  all  other  relig- 
ions, nothing  more  or  less.  A  science  tiiat  is  worthy  of 
the  name  can  only  set  out,  unhampered  by  any  preposses- 
sion of  whatever  character,  to  weigh  the  evidence  and  then 
decide  impartially  whether  or  not  the  religion  of  Israel  is 
to  be  differentiated  from  other  faiths,  whether  or  not 
Hoses  was  a  monotheist,  whether  or  not  he  prophesied  the 
Exile.  And  when  the  evidence  is  fairly  judged,  the  answer 
is  not  doubtful.  The  religion  of  Israel  m  different  from 
all  other  religions,  —  different  in  its  essential  nature,  in 
its  history  and  effects,  in  its  influence  on  the  world.  Mosea 
was  a  monotheist.  He  did  prophesy  the  Exile.  Only  a 
very  poor  psychologist  could  take  Ezekiel  for  a  knave  or 
a  dupe;  and  his  testimony  is  emphatic:  "Moreover  I  lifted 
up  mine  hand  unto  them  in  the  wilderness,  that  I  would 
scatter  them  among  the  nations,  and  disperse  them  through 
the  countries;  because  they  had  not  executed  my  judg- 
ments, but  had  rejected  my  statutes,  and  had  profaned 
my  sabbaths,  and  their  eyes  were  after  their  fathers'  idols  " 
(Ezek.  XX.  23  f.,  B.  V.),  The  passage  is  instructive  alike 
(or  its  bearings  upon  the  Pentateucbal  question  and  be- 
cause it  shows  how  fully  the  best  minds  in  Israel  realized 
from  first  to  last  the  enormous  diflSculty  of  making  and 
keeping  the  people  a  nation  of  priests. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


CRITICAL  NOTES 

THE  CRITICISM  OF  THE  OAAL  NABBATIVH   (Jud.  fx.  26-41) 

The  stopy  of  Gaal  (Jud.  ii.  26-41)  cannot  stand  in  its 
present  position.  Ab  Dr.  G.  A.  Cooke  remarks  on  verse  42 : 
"After  tlie  Sliechemitea  have  suffered  the  severe  defeat  just 
described,  and  Abimelech  has  retired  and  dwelt  at  Am- 
mah,  it  is  incredible  that,  on  the  next  morning,  the  people 
should  come  out  of  the  city  as  if  nothing  had  happened, 
and  that  Abimelech  should  be  able  to  surprise  them  by  the 
same  device  which  had  proved  so  successful  the  day  be- 
fore." He  thinks  verses  42-49  "  a  second  account  of  Abim- 
elech's  attack  on  Shechem,  originally  following  22-25." 
This  view, '  however,  only  raises  fresh  perplexities.  It  is 
ditBcult  to  believe  that  the  destruction  of  the  city  and  its 
Bowing  with  salt  (ver.  45)  is  sheer  invention,  for  the  nar- 
rative is  old,  and  there  would  have  been  historical  knowl- 
edge as  to  whether  the  city  was  destroyed  or  not.  But,  if 
we  accept  this,  and  regard  the  earlier  passage  as  a  dupli- 
cate, we  cannot  understand  either  how  the  Oaal  story  came 
to  be  invented  or  how  the  view  that  Bhechem  had  not  been 
destroyed  found  acceptance.  The  truth  is  that  both  nar- 
ratives (ver.  26-41  and  43  ff.)  have  the  appearance  of  be- 
ing strictly  historical,  and  the  difficulties  arise  not  from 
their  contents  but  from  their  present  position. 

It  is  su^:ested  that  the  solution  should  be  sought  in 
another  direction.  The  Gaal  narrative  perhaps  lacks  a 
beginning,  telling  who  Oaal  was  and  how  Abimelech  ap- 
pointed Zebul  as  his  governor  of  Shechon;  but,  subject  to 
that,  it  looks  like  a  thoroughly  credible  piece  of  historical 
writing.  What  is  wrong  is  its  position.  It  is  earlier  in  time 
than  the  events  that  brought  about  the  destruction  of  She- 
chem. If  it  be  placed  before  verse  22  or  23,  the  difficulties 
disappear.  It  relates  to  the  first  symptoms  of  disaffec- 
tion in  the  town.  These  Abimelech  sought  to  meet  by  less 
severe  measures  than  ultimately  proved  necessary.  Gaal 
and  his  brethren  were  expelled,  and  it  was  hoped  that  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


360  Bibliotheca  Sacra  {^viy, 

evidence  given  of  military  power  would  prove  sufficieat  to 
insure  loyalty.    Verses  22  ff,  tell  of  the  failure  of  that  hope. 

Verse  42  cannot  stand  as  at  present.  If  "  the  people  went 
oat  into  the  field  "  before  Abimelech  was  told,  it  is  not 
clear  how  they  could  have  come  forth  out  of  the  city  in 
verse  43  after  he  had  subsequently  laid  his  'ambush.  For 
the  words  "  on  the  morrow  that  the  people  vent  out,"  n 
reads  "when  the  men  went  forth";  but  d  and  the  Ethl- 
opic,  which  agree  otherwise  with  M.  T.,  omit  the  second 
"and"  (R.  V.  "that"),  which  sug^^ts  that  either  the 
first  or  the  second  clause  of  the  verse  is  an  insertion.  On 
the  whole,  I  think  it  most  lilcely  that  the  entire  verse  is 
due  to  editorial  efforts  to  make  the  narrative  read  after 
the  Oaal  episode  had  been  fiut  where  it  now  stands.  The 
words  "  and  they  told  Abimelech  "  resume  the  words  "  and 
it  was  told  Abimelech "  of  verse  25,  which  now  precedes 
the  Oaal  narrative.'  Such  a  resumption  is  not  uncommon 
where  something  is  inserted  in  the  text.  A  clear  instance 
is  found  in  Mum.  zxi.,  where  verse  31  resumes  verse  25 
after  the  insertion  of  verses  26  ft.,  in  which  a  commentator 
quotes  a  poem  that  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  Israelite 
conquest.  Similarly,  in  Ex.  vi.,  verses  28-30  resume  verses 
10  ff.,  the  narrative  having  been  interrupted  by  the  inser- 
tion of  the  earliest  form  of  the  narrative  which  now  in- 
tervenes.^ Hence  I  think  that  the  resumptive  words  were 
written  at. the  time  the  Oaal  narrative  was  placed  there, 
and  that  the  reference  to  the  morrow  was  subsequently 
added  to  smooth  the  difficulties  created  by  its  presence  in 
the  wrong  place. 

The  view  that  Jud.  ix.  26-41  constitutes  a  misplaced  nar- 
rative which  has  lost  its  introduction  is  strongly  confirmed 
by  the  results  of  rec^it  researches  into  the  earlier  form  of 
the  Old  Testament  books.  Time  and  again  we  come  across 
phenomena  which  point  to  their  one-time  transmission  in 
the  form  of  libraries  of  short  writings,  rather  than  of  long 
rolls.  Thus  we  read  of  the  book  of  the  generations  of  the 
>Cp.  C.  F.  Buniey,  Judges  (1918),  p.  268. 
■Cp.  BS.  April,  1919,  pp.  201 1. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  361 

heaven  and  the  earth  {Gen.  ii.  4,  LXX),  the  book  of  the 
generatioas  of  man  {v.  1),  the  book  in  which  Moses  was  to 
write  about  Amalek,  etc.  Misplaced  narratives  like  Gen. 
zxzvlii.,  Ex,  xviii.,  xxxiii.  7-11  (which  should  follow  xiil. 
22)  point  in  the  same  direction,  as  do  the  numerous  colo- 
phons of  the  Pentateuch  and  the  presence  of  fragments  of 
the  historical  narrative  in  unsuitable  positions  in  Deuter- 
onomy (iv.  44 fl.,  X.  6f.).'  In  the  Book  of  Joshua  the  evi- 
dences of  this  are  so  striking  as  to  make  anything  beyond 
a  hare  reference  superfluous, 

Hakold  M.  Wienbb 
London,  England 

AFTER  THE  WAR  — WHAT? 
Peace  is  at  last  declared  between  the  five  great  Powers. 
But  fifteen  or  twenty  of  the  smaller  Powers  are  still  in 
deadly  conflict  in  an  attempt  to  adjust  their  frontiers; 
and  the  whole  world  is  in  a  state  of  unstable  equilibrium. 
Social  conditions  are  everywhere  unsettled,  putting  into 
the  for^round  political  problems  that  in  every  nation  will 
test  not  only  the  skill  of  the  leaders  but  the  stability  of 
the  people  as  a  whole.  What  the  outcome  will  be  is  not 
within  the  province  of  human  wisdom  to  forecast.  Democ- 
racy is  in  a  fair  way  to  be  tried ;  but  it  is  by  no  means 
certain  that  the  "  voice  of  the  people  "  will  be  the  "  voice 
of  Qod."  Democracy  no  lees  than  autocracy  has  its  perils. 
Meanwhile  it  will  be  profitable  for  the  scholarly  world  to 
resume  its  old-time  activity.  One  of  the  greatest  calami- 
ties connected  with  the  war  has  been  its  interruption  of  the 
work  of  scholars  in  every  department  except  those  relat- 
ing to  the  devising  of  means  for  promoting  the  destruction 
of  anything  that  should  help  the  enemy.  Biblical  criticism, 
especially,  has  been  almost  at  a  standstill.  In  the  revival 
of  interest  that  is  sure  to  follow  the  advent  of  peace,  it 
is  to  be  hoped  the  field  of  criticism  as  well  as  of  politics 
will  be  free  from  the  domination  of  the  autocratic  methods 
that  have  prevailed. 

>  See  further  tbe  articles  In  BS  for  Jan.  ana  April,  1918. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


NOTICES  OF  RECENT  PUBLICATIONS 

The  Book  of  Dbutebonomt.  (The  Cambridge  Bible  for 
Sctiools  asd  Colleges.)  Id  tite  Revised  Version,  with 
Introduction  and  Notes.  By  Sir  Qborob  Adam  Smith^ 
Principal  and  Vice-Cliaucellor,  University  of  Aberdeen. 
16mo.  Pp.  cxxii,  396.  Cambridge:  At  the  Universily 
Press.    191S.    f2.00,  net. 

This  booli  is  a  fine  specimen  of  the  art  of  the  modem 
publisher.  It  is  a  large  volume  in  very  small  compass,  in 
clear  type  and  on  paper  that  makes  reading  easy,  yet  it 
would  go  into  a  pocket  of  quite  moderate  size. 

It  seems  almost  superfluous  to  say  anything  of  the  lit- 
erary character  of  the  book.  The  reputation  of  its  dis- 
tinguished aathor  ia  sufficient  guarantee  of  its  high  literary 
rank.  But  it  may  be  added,  that  this  work,  though  a  crit- 
ical commentary,  yet  often  reveals  the  charm  of  literary 
style  of  the  author's  "  Historical  Geography  of  the  Holy 
Land." 

The  conception  of  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy,  as  a  whole, 
which  the  book  presents,  ia  admirable,  as  brought  out  in 
some  of  the  finest  of  the  descriptive  passages  in  which  the 
book  abounds.  His  appreciation  of  the  literary  beauties 
of  Deuteronomy  never  flags.  Of  the  inspirational  exuber- 
ance of  expression  which  distinguishes  Deuteronomy  from 
the  other  books  of  the  Pentateuch,  he  has  this: — 

"The  individuality  and  distinction,  the  original  force, 
buoyancy,  volume  and  rhythm  of  the  style  of  I>euteronomy 
i.-xzz.  are  pervasive  and  coospicuons  throughout;  and  in 
particular  its  difference  is  indubitable,  both  in  form  and 
in  temper,  from  the  styles  of  the  other  constituents  of  the 
Pentateudi"  (p.  xviii). 

Of  the  expression  of  the  spiritual  conception  of  God 
which  distinguished  the  people  of  Israel  from  those  about 
them,  as  characteristic  of  all  the  boolu  of  the  Bible,  and 
superlatively  of  Deuteronomy,  this  long  paragraph  will 
convey  a  better  idea  than  anything  that  could  be  written 
about  it : — 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publicationa  363 

"  With  the  other  documents  Deuteronomy  shares  a  very 
spiritual  conception  of  the  relations  of  Israel  to  their  God. 
Though  the  religion  of  Israel,  especially  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, betrays  many  of  the  traits  common  to  all  the  fam- 
ilies of  the  race  from  which  Israel  sprang  —  many  forms 
of  ritual  and  ethical  tempera,  many  of  the  physical  phe- 
Domena  in  which  the  Dei^  was  believed  to  manifest  Him- 
self to  m^i,  and  especially  the  conception  of  Him  as  the 
God  of  one  people  through  whom  His  Name  and  Nature 
were  revealed  —  yet  the  origin  and  character  of  Jehovah's 
relations  to  Israel  are  not  (as  with  those  of  other  Semitic 
gods  to  their  peoples)  physical,  growing  oat  of  the  soil 
or  confined  to  one  land,  but  historical  and  moral.  Nor  are 
they  the  reflection  of  the  people's  own  character.  Jehovah 
chose  Israel  and  chose  them  not  for  their  strength  or  vir- 
tue but  out  of  pity  when  they  were  in  weakness  and  afflic- 
tion, and  redeemed  them;  and  they  had  traditions  of  His 
earlier  manifestations  to  some  of  their  forefathers,  to  in- 
dividual souls  of  their  race,  always  the  human  fountain- 
heads  of  spiritual  religions.  Jehovah's  providence  for  the 
nation  had  not  been  only  physical  or  political,  by  signs 
and  great  wonders  and  by  war,  but  ethical,  to  instruct  and 
discipline  them,  to  prove  and  sift  them ;  and  the  religious- 
nesH  of  Israel  was  the  moral  response  to  all  this,  a  trust 
in  His  faithfulness,  gratitude  and  the  endeavour  to  keep 
His  commandments.  They  felt  that  He  was  unique  with  a 
uniqueness  both  of  power  and  character  among  the  gods  of 
mankind ;  and  that  by  His  influence  they  had  a  conscience 
and  character  and  a  religious  wisdom  of  their  own.  So 
far  all  the  documents  of  the  Pentateuch  are  at  one;  th^ 
all  reach  this  levd"  (p.  xxvi). 

But  such  passages  are  of  very  limited  extent  in  this 
Commentary.  These  two  quotations  almost  exhaust  them 
in  the  120  pages  of  Introduction,  and  the  echoes  of  them 
are  scant  and  of  small  extent  throughout  the  commentary 
that  follows.  The  book  is  "  criticism  " :  it  is  nothing,  if 
not  critical.  In  the  criticism  that  covers  every  page,  there 
is  displayed  a  wealth  of  leamiog  —  Biblical,  geographical, 
arclueological,  and  classical.  In  the  use  of  a  wide  and  va- 
ried scholarship,  few  books  equal  it,  and  few,  indeed,  have 
ever  surpassed  it.  One  could  wish  it  were  possible  to  feel 
that  this  breadth  of  learning  was  always  used  conclusively. 

A  very  large  portion  of  the  introductory  chapters  and 
ToL  LZZVI.    No.  SOS.    7 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


864  Bibliotheca  8acra  [July, 

of  the  coDnnent  itself  is  taken  np  with  the  "  difficulties  " 
of  Deuteronomy.  It  is  manifestly  impossible  to  take  note 
of  all  tliese  "  difficulties."  To  do  this  would  not  be  to  re- 
view a  tKH>k,  bat  to  write  a  book.  Only  the  maio  points  of 
attack  upon  the  Book  of  Deuteronomy  can  be  noticed. 

But  before  even  these  main  points  may  be  mentioned,  the 
standpoint  of  the  author  must  be  clearly  understood,  and 
also  the  real  significance  of  that  standpoint  in  any  esti- 
mate of  his  criticism.  The  standpoint  throughout  the  book, 
upon  which  all  its  difficulties  and  criticisms  rest,  and  for 
which  he  gives  almost  numberless  references  to  all  the  books 
of  the  Law,  is  that  Deuteronomy  is  later  than  the  JE  doc- 
ument of  the  documentary  theory,  representing  portions 
of  Exodus  and  Numbers,  and  also  later  than  the  P  docu- 
ment, chiefly  represented,  among  the  Law  books,  in  the 
Book  of  Leviticus.  This  position,  taken  and  kept  before 
the  mind  of  the  reader,  is  somewhat  misleading,  especially 
to  young  students  of  "  schools  and  colleges,"  for  whom  it 
is  prepared. 

There  is  no  doubt  in  the  mind  of  anyone  that  Deuter- 
onomy is  later,  and  represents  a  later  development  of  Is- 
rael's laws,  than  do  Exodus  and  Numbers.  Moreover,  a 
long  period  of  special  instruction  and  discipline  and  devd- 
opment  in  the  wilderness  ought  certainly  to  prepare  the 
people  for  some  progress  towards  higher  things  at  the  time 
of  the  addresses  of  Moses  on  the  plains  of  Moab,  which  are 
recorded  in  Deuteronomy.  So  that  all  the  elaborate  ref- 
erences and  argument  to  the  effect  that  Deuteronomy  is 
later  and  represents  a  later  development  of  law  than  these 
other  books  of  the  Law,  are  entirely  gratuitous  and  only 
becloud  the  issue  for  inexperienced  students. 

The  only  real  question  at  this  point  is,  whether  or  not 
Deuteronomy  represents  a  later  development  of  law  and 
life  in  Israel  than  does  Leviticus,  mainly  referred  to  the  P 
document.  Keeping  this  in  mind,  the  following  may  be 
noted  as  among  the  principal  points  made  in  the  criticism 
of  Deuteronomy  by  the  distinguished  author  of  this  Com- 
mentary : — 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1819]  Notices  of  Recent  Publicatiom  365 

I.  "  Difficulties  "  in  Deateronomy.  Much  ia  made  of  the 
"  distinctiveuess  of  style  of  Deuteronomy "  as  one  of  the 
things  that  set  the  book  entirely  apart  from  the  other 
Books  of  the  Law  in  authorship,  time,  and  religions  con- 
ceptions and  expressions.  Among  many  examples  the  fol- 
lowing wUl  be  sufficient: — 

"  Even  when  it  repeats  statements  or  expressions  found 
in  JB  it  expands  these  or  gives  a  turn  to  them  that  is  all 
its  own  and  tuned  to  its  peculiar  rhythm.  Common  in- 
stances are  its  formal  and  hortatory  additions  to  some  of 
the  laws;  bnt  its  narratives  are  full  of  them.  In  these  it 
increases  the  adjectives  or  turns  them  into  superlatives, 
replaces  a  plain  phrase  by  one  more  concrete  and  vivid, 
strikes  an  emphasis,  or  lifts  a  simple  statement  of  fact  into 
a  hyperbole"  (p.  xiv). 

Among  striking  instances  of  the  expansion  of  the  phrases 
of  JE  are 

"  the  turning  of  E's  phrase  great  nation,  Ex.  xxxii.  10,  into 
o  nation  mightier  and  greater  than  they,  ii.  14,  and  of  the 
thousands  of  Ex.  xx.  6  into  a  thousand  generations,  vii.  9; 
or  the  concentration  and  enhancement  of  E's  thick  cloud 
and  thick  darkness,  from  separate  passages,  into  the  dark- 
ness, cloud,  and  thick  darkness  of  iv.  11"  (p.  xvii),  etc. 

These  changes  in  the  language  between  Exodus  and  Deu- 
teronomy are,  of  course,  indisputable,  but  have  nothing  to 
do  with  a  change  of  authorship :  they  are  exactly  what  they 
ought  to  be  to  accord  with  the  change  in  circumstances 
and  in  the  immediate  purpose  of  Moses.  Will  there  not 
be  just  such  a  difference  between  the  formulation  and  pro- 
mulgation of  laws  by  a  lawyer,  now,  and  a  popular  speech 
before  the  people  by  the  same  lawyer  concerning  the  same 
laws?  In  the  one  case  he  is  the  lawgiver;  in  the  other,  the 
statesman.  In  the  one  case  there  is  the  enactment  of  laws 
and  the  narrative  of  their  promulgation ;  in  the  other,  a 
popular  exposition  and  exhortation.  These  same  remarks 
apply  to  many  other  criticisms  made  against  Deuteronomy 
on  acconnt  of  the  manifest  advance  in  national  life  and 
conceptions.  Forty  years  of  special  tutelage  of  a  people 
cut  off  as  were  these  in  the  wilderness  may  do  mnch  for 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


366  Bibliotkeca  Sacra  [July, 

good.  See  what  changes  for  evil  were  made  in  the  natiooal 
life  and  ideas  of  Qennany  in  fort;  years.  Progress  here 
affords  no  legitimate  groand  for  criticism;  no  progresa 
would  furnish  such  ground. 

Of  a  number  of  "  difSculties  "  about  facts  which  trouble 
the  author,  we  may  examine  the  most  important: — 

"  But  the  most  critical  of  the  divergencea  as  to  fact 
which  Deuteronomy  exhibits  is  one  from  both  JE  and  F  — 
that  on  the  amount  and  character  of  the  Law  promulgated 
to  all  Israel  on  Sinai-Horeb.  Deuteronomy  states  that  the 
Ten  Commandments,  iv.  13,  and  the  Ten  Commandments 
only  —  he  added  no  more,  v.  22  —  were  the  words  of  the 
Covenant  at  Horeb ;  the  people  also  were  too  terrified  to  hear 
more  so  the  Lord  delivered  His  further  commands  to  Moses 
alone  (t.  25-32),  who  did  not  communicate  these  to  the 
people  till  the  eve  of  crossing  the  Jordan  and  they  form 
Deuteronomy's  Code,  chs.  xii.-xxvi.,  the  basis  of  the  Sec- 
ond Covenant  in  Moab.  But  JE  assigns  to  Horeb  the  far 
longer  and  more  detailed  Code,  Ex.  zz.  23-xxiii.  19,  and 
states  that  —  not  the  Decalogue  bat  —  this,  written  out  as 
the  Book  of  the  Covenant  and  publicly  read,  formed  the 
basis  of  Israel's  covenant  with  God  at  Horeb,  Ei.  zziv. 
3-S"  (p.  XX). 

The  notice  of  three  things  will  bring  out  the  amazing 
character  of  this  criticism  by  the  author,  to  which  be  calls 
also  the  corroboration  of  the  opinion  of  Dr.  Driver. 

1.  "  The  Ten  Commandments  only  —  he  added  no  more, 
V.  22  —  were  the  words  of  the  Covenant  at  Horeb."  Here 
is  the  fallacy  of  seeking  discord.  "  He  added  no  more " 
means  either  on  that  occasion,  or,  absolutely,  at  any  time. 
Dr.  Smith  takes  it  to  mean  at  any  time,  which  produces 
the  discord  he  seeks.  But  Ood  had  just  ended  the  speaking 
of  the  Ten  Commandments.  "  He  added  no  more  "  to  the 
Decalogue.  He  also  "  added  no  more  "  on  that  occasion  on 
any  subject.  Still  further,  the  voice  "  added  no  more  "  at 
any  time  on  any  subject.  This  so  manifestly  exhausts  the 
meaning  of  the  expression  in  its  connection,  that  to  stretch 
it  to  mean  that  it  rules  out  promulgating  of  the  "  judg- 
ments" (Ex.  xxi.-zxiii.  19)   is  an  absurdity  that  would 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publicatiom  367 

Bever  occur  to  anyone  not  under  the  dominance  of  a  pre- 
conception tliat  required  just  this. 

2.  "  The  Lord  delivered  His  further  commands  to 
Moses  alone  (t.  25-32),  who  did  not  commnnlcate  these  to 
the  people  till  the  eve  of  crossing  the  Jordan  and  they  form 
Deuteronomy's  Code,  chs.  xll.-xxvi,,  the  basis  of  the  Sec- 
ond Cov^iant  in  Moab.  But  JE  assigns  to  Horeb  the  far 
longer  and  more  detailed  Code,  Ex.  xx,  23-sxiii.  19,  and 
states  that  —  not  the  Decalogue  but  —  this,  written  out  as 
the  Book  of  the  Covenant  and  publicly  read,  formed  the 
basis  of  Israel's  covenant  with  God  at  Horeb,  Ex.  zxiv. 
3-8."  If  anyone  will  take  a  good  reference  Bible  and  read 
the  Code  in  Deut.  xii.-xxvi.,  together  with  the  constant  ref- 
erences to  Exodus,  Leviticus,  and  Numbers,  he  will  dis- 
cover for  himself  that  the  statement  that  Moses  "  did  not 
communicate  these,"  i.e.  the  laws  given  to  him  at  Sinai, 
until  the  addresses  on  the  plains  of  Moab,  is  amazing  be- 
yond comprehoision.  It  is  true  that  many  of  the  laws 
mentioned  in  Deut.  xii.-xxri.  are  to  be  found  in  Leviticns, 
which  the  author  assigns  to  P  at  a  very  late  date.  But 
that  assignment  belongs  to  his  theory,  and  not  to  the  facts 
with  which  he  must  prove  his  theory. 

3.  The  other  part  of  the  statement  quoted  above,  that 
"  not  the  Decalogue  but  —  this,  written  out  as  the  Book 
of  the  Covenant  and  pnblicly  read,  formed  the  basis  of 
Israel's  covenant  with  God  at  Horeb,  Ex.  ixiv.  3-8,"  is 
equally  erroneous.  The  statements  of  Ex.  xxiv.  3-8  are: 
"And  Moses  came  and  told  the  people  all  the  words  of  the 
Lord,  and  all  the  judgments:  and  all  the  people  answered 
with  one  voice,  and  said.  All  the  words  which  the  Lord 
hath  spoken  will  we  do.  .  .  .  And  he  took  the  book  of  the 
covenant,  and  read  in  the  audience  of  the  people :  and  they 
said:  All  that  the  Lord  hath  spoken  will  we  do,  and  be 
obedient."  The  introduction  to  the  Decalogue  is,  "And  God 
spake  all  these  words,  saying"  (Ex.  xx.  1).  Deuteronomy 
V.  22  says  of  the  Decalogue,  "  These  words  the  Lord  spake 
unto  all  your  assembly  in  the  monnt  out  of  the  midst  of 
the  fire."    Deuteronomy  v.  31  says,  "  Stand  thou  here  by 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


368  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

me,  and  I  will  speak  nuto  thee  all  the  commaDdtuents,  and 
the  statutes,  and  the  judgments."  Exodus  xxxlv.  28  de- 
fines still  more  explicitly  thus:  "And  he  wrote  upon  the 
tables  the  words  of  the  covenant,  the  ten  commandments" 
(Heb.  "words").  This  puts  beyond  all  question  that  both 
the  Decalogue  and  the  Judgments  of  Ex.  xxi.-xxiii.  19 
were  included  in  the  Covenant  read  to  the  people  at  Horeb. 
Yet  Smith  says ;  "  Not  the  Decalogue  but  —  this  [the  judg- 
ments] .  .  .  formed  the  basis  of  Israel's  covenant  with  God 
at  Horeb." 

Another  typical  "  difficnlty  "  that  appears  frequently  in 
one  fonn  or  another  is,  that,  to  the  directions  for  the  Tab- 
ernacle and  the  statutes  of  the  Ceremonial  Law  (Ex.  xxv.- 
xxxi.)  and  the  Book  of  Leviticns,  except  the  Holiness  Code, 
"  Deuteronomy  makes  no  reference,  and  has  very  little  ma- 
terial in  common  with  it"  (p.  xii). 

As  to  the  matter  of  fact,  Deut.  xxxi.  14-16  does  make 
"  reference "  to  the  Tabernacle  in  such  fashion  as  to  as- 
sume very  complete  knowledge  on  the  part  of  the  people 
concerning  the  Tabernacle  and  the  important  place  it  held 
in  Israel ;  "And  the  Lord  said  unto  Moses,  Behold,  thy 
days  approach  that  thou  must  die;  call  Joshua,  and  pre- 
sent yourselves  in  the  tent  of  meeting,  that  I  may  give  him 
a  charge.  And  Moses  and.  Joshua  went,  and  presented 
themselves  in  the  tent  of  meeting.  And  the  Lord  appeared 
in  the  Tent  in  a  pillar  of  cloud :  and  the  pillar  of  cloud 
stood  over  the  door  of  the  Tent." 

But  if  there  was  uot  a  word  about  the  Tabernacle,  the 
"  difficulty  "  would  need  nothing  more  to  resolve  it  than 
the  clear  apprehension  of  the  character  and  parpose  of 
Deuteronomy.  Hoses  there  speaks,  not  as  the  aacerdotal- 
ist,  but  as  the  religious  statesman,  to  the  people  as  citizois 
of  the  Promised  Land  into  which  they  were  about  to  enter. 

A  few  of  the  frequent  examples  of  "  difficulties  "  noted 
by  the  author  which  are  similar  to  the  last  may  be  men- 
tioned briefly: — 

"  The  Code  of  Deuteronomy,  xii.-xxvi.,  not  only  (as  we 
have  seen)  expands  with  its  own  rhetoric  some  of  the  laws 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  2foticea  of  Recent  Publications  369 

of  JB;  bat  it  extends  their  application,  enforces  them  with 
fresh  motives,  frequently  modifies  them,  and  adds  new  laws 
creating  new  institutions  —  all  in  a  way  that  reflects  a 
more  mature  and  complex  form  of  society  than  that  for 
which  the  codes  of  JE  as  they  stand  in  Ex.  xx.  23-xxiii.  19 
and  Ex.  xxxir.  are  designed"  (p.  xxii). 
Exactly  so;  these  forty  years  in  the  wilderness  were  the 
formative  period,  distinctly  so  represented  in  the  Penta- 
teuch, and  Moses  was  still  the  lawgiver. 

"  But  nowhere  else  in  the  Pentateuch  has  the  love  of 
God  to  man  such  free  course  as  in  Deuteronomy ;  and  no- 
where else  is  man's  love  to  God  invoked,  except  once  in 
Ex.  XX.  6,  and  that  is  a  deuteronomic  addition  to  the  Dec- 
alogue! [exclamation  mine].  These  two,  God's  love  to  man 
and  man's  love  to  God,  are  everywhere  in  Deuteronomy  " 
(p.  xxvi). 

All  this  to  ai^e  for  a  late  date  for  Deuteronomy. 

But  how  much  better,  and  how  perfectly  natural,  this 
advance  in  spiritual  ideas  is  as  a  mere  progress  of  doctrine 
under  the  divine  tutelage,  and  how  exactly  in  accord  with 
the  facts  in  the  case!  The  people  must  be  gotten  away 
from  the  materialism  of  Egypt,  and  little  by  little  given 
spiritual  ideas  of  God  and  of  a  holy  life  —  light  for  dark- 
ness, love  for  hate.  God  is  first  revealed  as  the  light  of  the 
world  at  the  burning  bush,  in  contrast  with  the  Egyptian 
idea  that  God  dwells  in  darkness ;  then,  in  the  plagues,  God's 
attributes,  one  by  one,  are  revealed  —  his  being,  his  power, 
his  wisdom,  his  goodness,  and,  last  of  all,  his  mercy.  This  is 
almost  the  exact  order  found  in  a  very  famous  fo)-raula  to 
which  Dr.  Smith  is  a  professed  adherent.  "  God  is  a  spirit, 
infinite  and  eternal  in  His  being,  wisdom,  power,  holiness, 
justice,  goodness,  and  truth."  Moreover,  this  spirit  of  Deu- 
teronomy, pointed  out  in  the  words  quoted  above  from  Dr. 
Smith,  are  specially  suited  to  the  purpose  of  Deuteronomy, 
which  is  hortatory ;  while  the  other  books  of  the  Law  are 
legislative. 

"  The  contrast  presented  by  P's  and  Deuteronomy's  pic- 
tures of  the  worshipping  congregation  in  the  central  Sanc- 
tuary is  very  striking:  in  P  the  awful  glory  of  the  Divine 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


370  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Joly, 

Presence,  bells,  trumpets,  sweet  savour  of  frankinccnee, 
gorgeous  Testments,  careful  ablutions  and  all  the  people 
shouting  and  falling  on  their  faces;  in  Deuteronomy  only  a 
set  of  happy  households  eating  of  the  BacriScial  meal  and 
rejoicing  before  tJie  Lord,  altogether  joyful"   (p.  xiviii). 

And  why  should  there  not  be  exactly  this  difference?  Dea- 
teronomy  prepares  for  national  religious  life,  Leviticus  de- 
scribes the  worship  of  the  Sanctuary. 

To  come  to  that  which  is  distinctly  set  forth  as  the  great- 
est of  all  the  "  difficulties,"  note  this : — 

"  But  the  cardinal  distinction  of  the  Code  of  Deoteroo- 
omy  is  the  law  of  the  One  Altar  and  Sanctuary,  ch.  xii. 
2-14,  17-19,  26  f.,  along  with  the  necessary  conseqnaices 
of  this  in  new,  or  modified,  laws  upon  the  slaughter  of 
beasts  elsewhere  than  at  the  Altar"  (p.  zxiv),  etc. 

Again,  he  speaks  of  the  early  "  validity  of  sacrifice  to  Je- 
hovah at  any  altar  where  He  may  record  Hia  Name.  Deu- 
teronomy forbids  all  altars  save  one,  and  confines  sacri- 
fice to  it"  (p.  xxv). 

The  argument  made  for  the  sharp  distinction  between 
the  expression  "every  place"  (Ex.  xx.  24)  and  the  similar 
expression,  "  the  place "  or  "  a  place,"  with  definitive  de- 
scription (Deut.  xii.  5)  has  never  seemed  to  me  by  any 
means  conclusive.  Let  us  consider  the  use  of  the  expres- 
sion "  the  place,"  as  in  Deut.  xii.  5.  That  it  does  at  times 
mean  one  definite  place  is  certain,  as  when  it  is  said  (Lev. 
iv.  24) :  "And  he  shall  lay  his  hand  upon  the  head  of  the 
goat,  and  kill  it  in  the  place  where  they  kill  the  burnt  offer- 
ing before  the  Lord:  it  is  a  sin  offering."  Or  in  1  Kings 
xxi.  19:  "And  thou  shalt  speak  unto  him,  saying,  Thus 
saith  the  Lord,  Hast  thou  killed,  and  also  taken  possession? 
and  thou  shalt  speak  unto  him,  saying,  Thus  saith  the 
Lord,  In  the  place  where  dogs  licked  the  blood  of  Naboth 
shall  dogs  lick  thy  blood,  even  thine."  But,  on  the  other 
hand,  we  read  in  Lev.  siii,  19,  "  In  the  place  of  the  boil," 
etc.  Was  there  only  one  place  on  a  man  in  which  there 
could  be  a  itoil  in  those  days?  In  Num.  ix.  17,  "  In  the 
place  where  the  cloud  abode."  Was  there  but  one  place  in 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Iftlft]  Notices  of  Recent  Publicationa  371 

all  the  wilderness  wanderings  where  the  "cloud  abode"? 
If  those  who  set  so  much  store  by  the  distinction  between 
"  every  place  "  and  "  the  place  "  will  examine  the  vast  num- 
ber of  places  in  the  Old  Testament  In  which  these  expres- 
sions are  found  in  the  Hebrew,  they  will  see  a  "  great 
light"  that  will  prove  somewhat  blinding,  indeed. 

There  is  also  clear  evidence  of  a  c^itral  place  of  wor^ 
ship  in  Palestine  after  the  entrance  into  the  land,  and  long 
before  the  occupation  of  Jerusalem  and  the  building  of  the 
temple  there.  Of  course  the  author,  like  others  of  his 
school,  sets  aside  the  evidence  of  the  Tabernacle  at  Shiloh ; 
but  he  does  this  by  Invoking  his  theory  to  supply  the  facta, 
Instead  of  finding  facts  to  prove  his  theory.  By  rewriting 
the  Pentateuch  it  becomes  necessary  to  rewrite  the  other 
early  Bible  history  also.  What  a  wide  conspiracy  of  his- 
torians there  must  have  been  across  the  centuries  and  over 
the  lands  so  to  reflect  back  events  upon  the  screen  of  an- 
tiquity as  to  produce  such  an  harmonious  early  picture! 
more  harmonious,  indeed,  than  the  picture  produced  by 
the  reconstructed  history.  For,  despite  all  the  talk  about 
"  historical  difficulties,"  and  the  real  historical  difficulties 
that  there  certainly  are,  the  efforts  of  the  historical  critics 
get  us  into  more  difficulties  of  this  sort  than  they  get  us 
ont  of. 

But  if  there  be  really  a  difference  between  Deuteronomy 
and  the  earlier  legislation  it  is  but  a  perfectly  natural 
progress  of  revelation  in  forty  years  and  for  totally  dif- 
ferent conditions  of  life,  and  Moses  was  still  latogiver.  Is 
not  progress  in  revelation  one  of  the  cardinal  doctrines  of 
criticism?  Then,  the  conditions  were  about  to  be  so  dif- 
ferent as  to  require  progress  in  doctrine.  For  forty  years 
the  people  have  been  moving  about  and  carrying  their  place 
of  worship  with  them.  Now  the  people  are  about  to  enter 
the  Promised  Land  and  be  given  settled  habitations  in  sev- 
eralty, and  hereafter  each  man  is  to  abide  in  his  place. 
Where  shall  he  worship?  Deuteronomy  meets  that  new 
situation  explicitly;  and  there  is  clearest  evidence,  except 
it  be  set  aside  in  favor  of  a  theory,  that  there  was  imme- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


372  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

diate  and  continued  compliance,  in  some  good  part,  with 
that  new  regalation.  That  the  full  emergence  of  an  obe- 
dient religious  life,  on  the  part  of  all  the  people,  took  four 
hundred  rears,  and  more,  ia  in  accord  with  the  religious 
progress  of  other  peoples;  and  that  there  should  be  a  de- 
cline, and  eventually  a  real  apostasy  and  afterwards  a 
reformation,  has  its  parallel  in  the  progress  of  Christian- 
ity itself. 

II.  There  are  difficulties  in  Deuteronomy  and  in  all  the 
Pentateuch.  There  are  bound  to  be  difficulties  when  an  Oc- 
cidental reads  an  Oriental  book.  I  wonder  if  art  Oriental 
higher  critic  would  not  find  more  difficulties  in  Smith'it 
"  Deuteronomy  "  than  Smith  finds  in  Moses'  Deuteronomy. 
What,  e.g.,  would  onr  Oriental  make  out  of  the  fact  that 
in  this  book  so  many  things  are  considered  twice  —  in  the 
introductory  discussions  and  in  the  comment?  Are  these 
"doublets"?  Or  is  it  possible  (dare  I  suggest  it?)  that 
the  learned  author  has  used  the  woi*  of  another?  that  a 
different  hand  is  to  be  seen  in  these  repetitions?  Have  we 
here  different  documents  by  different  authors? 

Page  Ixvii  refers  to  a  vast  number  of  items  from  the 
body  of  the  book,  and  gives  this  note :  "All  these  distinc- 
tions are  marked  in  the  notes  to  the  text,  but  they  may  be 
nsefully  arranged  here.*'  This  is,  of  course,  just  such  a 
note  as  a  redactor  would  have  inserted  to  make  things 
smooth,  or  it  might  be  a  gloss  that  has  crept  in  from  the 
margin  (cf.  p.  Ixxi,  top  of  page,  with  p.  224,  middle  of 
page).  What  are  we  to  think  of  such  manifest  discrep- 
ancies, not  to  say  contradictions,  as  page  xviii,  lines  11-13, 
"  The  individuality  and  distinction,  the  original  force, 
buoyancy,  volume  and  rhythm  of  the  style  of  Deuteronomy 
i.-xzx.  are  pervasive  and  conspicuons  throughout,"  com- 
pared with  page  Ixzi,  lines  11-13,  "  The  non-deuteronomic 
style  of  many  of  the  laws  indicates  that  these  were  not 
original  to  the  author  or  authors  of  Deuteronomy  but  bor- 
rowed "? 

These  instances  of  difficulties  in  Smith's  "  Deuteronomy  " 
mi{|^t  be  multiplied,  if  not  ad  infinUum,  at  least  ad  nau- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  373 

seam.  An  Oriental  literary  critic  might  find  them  real 
difficulties. 

III.  I  tarn  now  with  sadness  to  something  I  am  very 
loath  to  say.  As  a  commentai?  this  book  is  given  over  to 
criticism,  almost  wholly  literary  and  historical  criticism. 
It  deals  with  the  literary  problems  and  with  historical 
difficalties  and  scarcely  at  all  with  interpretation  of  the 
meaning  of  the  writer.  Deuteronomy  is  one  of  the  most 
Inspiring  of  the  early  Old  Testament  books,  not  surpassed 
in  this  respect  nntil  we  come  to  the  Psalms  and  the  later 
prophets.  Yet,  of  spiritual  nplift,  there  is  almost  nothing 
at  all  in  this  book.  The  distinguished  author  once  wrote 
a  book  nnder  the  title  "  Modem  Criticism  and  the  Preach- 
ing of  the  Old  Testament."  If  this  commentary  which  he 
now  puts  out  is  an  index,  the  second  part  of  the  title  of 
the  former  book  might  be  dropped  —  there  is  little  or  noth- 
ing to  preach.  Yet  this  is  published  as  a  part  of  "  The 
Cambridge  Bible  for  Schools  and  Colleges." 

Is  the  Bible  nothing  more  to  modern  criticism  than  an 
exercise  in  rhetoric?  Has  criticism  nothing  to  do  any 
more  with  interpretation?  Is  it  wholly  a  cold-blooded 
work  of  the  glittering  scalpel?  With  literary  fervor  and 
glow  the  book  is  resplendent.  Of  spiritual  fervor  there  is 
nothing:  it  is  as  cold  as  an  arctic  night.  Spiritual  life 
must  certainly  freeze  to  death  in  such  an  atmosphere. 

Let  us  look  at  a  few  passages  of  comment,  selected  not  by 
minate  search,  but  taken  almost  at  random.  On  the  sub- 
lime passage  of  the  blessings  (Deut.  xxviii.  3-S),  "  Blessed 
Shalt  thou  be  in  the  city,  and  blessed  shalt  thou  be  in  the 
field.  Blessed  shall  be  the  fruit  of  thy  body,  and  the  fruit 
of  thy  gronnd,  and  the  fruit  of  thy  cattle,  the  increase  of 
thy  kine,  and  the  young  of  tby  fiock.  Blessed  shalt  thou 
be  when  thou  comest  in,  and  blessed  shalt  thou  be  when 
thou  goest  out,"  we  have  on  page  308  this  comment : — 

"  Six  forms  of  blessing,  each  introduced  by  the  passive 
participle  of  the  verb  to  bless.  They  cover  Israel's  life:  in 
town  and  field,  in  their  offspring,  crops  and  cattle,  annual 
harvests  and  daily  bread,  all  their  movement  out  and  in. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


874  Bibliotheca  Sacra,  [3aiy, 

The  structure  of  the  first  two  and  last  three  is  oniform : 
with  three  accaita.  The  longer  third,  verse  4,  has  bem 
expanded ;  fruit  of  thy  cattle  doea  not  appear  in  the  LXX 
nor  in  the  parallel  verse  18,  and  la  probably  a  gloss  from 
verse  11 " ! 

On  Dent.  viii.  3,  which  he  translates,  "  That  he  mi^t 
make  thee  know  that  man  doth  not  live  by  bread  only,  but 
by  everything  that  ppoceedeth  out  of  the  month  of  the 
LOBD  doth  man  live,"  he  has  the  following : — 

"  The  language  —  in  particular,  every  thing  —  is  ambig- 
uous. It  is  usually  reed  as  expressing  an  antithesis  be- 
tween bread,  the  natural  or  normal  support  of  man  and 
produced  by  himself,  on  the  one  hand,  and  on  the  other, 
when  bread  falls,  the  creative  word  of  Ood  with  whatever 
{=every  thing)  it  may  produce  (so  Driver  and  Bertholet, 
etc.,  with  differences) .  But  the  antithesis  is  rather  be- 
tween only  and  every  thing:  man  lives  not  upon  bread  only, 
but  upon  everything  (bread  included)  that  proceedeth  out 
of  the  mouth  |0f  Ood.  On  the  word  of  Ood,  creative  and 
determining,  from  time  to  time  changing  what  man  shall 
live  upon,  but  always  the  cause  of  this,  man  is  utterly  and 
always  dependent.  This  is  in  harmony  with  the  teaching 
of  D  throughout,  that  of  all  material  blessings  the  Ood 
of  Israd  alone  is  the  author.  By  translating  every  word 
tor  every  thing  the  LXX  sways  the  meaning  in  another 
direction :  that  man  lives  not  by  material  food  only  but 
by  the  spiritual  guidance  of  Ood ;  and  this  is  the  antithesis 
which  Christ  appears  to  present  in  Matt.  iv.  4,  Although 
such  a  higher  spiritual  meaning  is  not  expressed  in  this 
verse.  It  underlies  the  context,  which  reminds  Israel  that 
Ood's  providence  of  them  has  been  not  only  physical,  but 
moral  as  well"  (pp.  118-119). 

One  cannot  help  thinking  it  would  be  interesting  to  bear 
Christ's  comment  upon  this  criticism  of  his  interpretation 
of  Deuteronomy! 

There  is  just  about  as  much  spiritual  uplift  in  this  copi- 
mentary  as  in  a  commentary  upon  Euripides  or  the  Twdve 
Tables  of  the  Romans.  Is  this  the  best  that  modem  schol- 
arship can  do  for  the  young  of  "schools  and  colleges"? 
Is  criticism  spiritually  bankrupt? 

I  know  very  weU  the  biting  cold  sneer  with  which  sach 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  375 

strictnres  will  be  received  by  those  to  whom  this  is  all  of 
criticism,  and  such  criticism  is  all  of  Biblical  scholarBhip. 
Bnt  I  have  no  thought  of  bitterness.  Some  of  the  men  of 
huch  modern  views  are  my  dear  personal  friends;  but  the 
Christian  heart  is  wearied  and  chilled  by  a  criticism  that 
has  forgotten  ita  warming  and  inspiring  function  of  inter- 
pretation and  is  content  to  be  nothing  more  than  a  refrig- 
erating plant 

The  review  of  this  book  ma;  be  summed  up  thus,  to  quote 
the  facetious  words  of  Lincoln :  "  Those  that  lilie  that  eort 
of  thing,  I  BuppoBe  that  is  about  the  sort  of  thing  they 
wonld  like."  Those  who  wish  to  know  now  about  modem 
criticism  and  the  preaching  of  the  Old  Testament  will  &ud 
out  by  a  study  of  this  book,  and  the  schools  and  colleges 
will  experience  very  much  of  the  literary  bent  which  mod- 
em criticism  aims  to  give,  but  yer;  little  of  the  spiritual 
uplift  which  Deuteronomy  was  intended  to  give. 

Mblvin  Qrotb  Kyle 

Philadelphia,  Pa, 

The  Nbo-Platonists.  By  Thomas  Whittakiil  New  E3di- 
tion.  12mo.  Pp.  xt,  318.  1918.  Cambridge:  At  the 
University  Preas.    128.,  net. 

The  first  edition  of  this  work  appeared  in  1901,  and  is 
now  enlarged.  Plotinus  is  a  philosopher  who  seems  well 
in  the  way  of  coming  into  his  own.  Dr.  Bigg  had  directed 
attention  to  Plotinus  in  1896,  I  had  myself  done  so  in  the 
German  Archiv  for  philosophy  in  1902,  Dr.  E.  Caird  had 
written  of  him  in  1904,  bnt  only  now  hare  we  such  full 
treatments  as  Dean  Inge  and  Mr.  Whittaker  have  given 
UB.  Both  are  works  of  much  scholarship,  the  religious  phi- 
losophy of  Plotinus  receiving  ampler  treatment  in  the 
larger  work  by  Dean  Inge,  bnt  the  metaphysical  side  of 
Plotinus  calling  for  the  supplementary  treatment  provided 
by  Mr.  Whittaker's  work.  Both  these  works  are  important, 
not  only  for  their  detailed  treatment  of  the  teachings  of 
Plotinus,  bnt  also  because  of  the  relations  or  connections 
snbsiflting  between  Neo-Platonism  and  Christianity,  whether 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


376  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [July, 

we  can  accept  the  accouat  of  either  of  them  —  and  I  do  not 
think  we  can  —  as  quite  satisfactory  and  final.  But  it  is 
only  the  work  of  Mr.  Whittaker  with  which  I  am  now  con- 
cerned. 

Mr.  Whittaker  deals  very  fully  with  PlotinuB,  the  great 
genius  of  the  third  century,  in  his  historical  setting,  and 
also  in  his  historic  influence.  Thus  he  opens  with  chap- 
ters on  "  Qneco-Roman  CivUiaation  in  its  Political  Devel- 
opment," "  The  Stages  of  Greek  Philosophy,"  "  Beligioua 
Developments  in  Later  4-ntiquity,"  "  Plotinus  and  his 
Nearest  Predecessors";  while,  after  chapters  that  deal 
with  the  system  of  Plotinus,  and  its  diffusion,  he  engages 
himself  with  the  historic  "  Influence  of  Neo-Platouism." 
The  system  of  Plotinus  is  dealt  with  in  detailed  form  un- 
der separate  headings  of  its  Psychology,  Metaphysics,  Cos- 
mology and  Theodicy,  ^Esthetics,  and  Ethics.  Later,  the 
system  of  Proclus  is  also  dealt  with,  in  somewhat  detaUed 
fashion  likewise.  These  are  the  really  valuable  parts  of 
the  work,  which  is  one  for  the  pure  student,  not  the  gen- 
eral reader.  It  seems  strange  that  the  century-old  work 
of  Thomas  Taylor  should  be  acknowledged,  and  no  men- 
tion made  of  the  work  on  Proclus  by  Thomas  M.  Johnson, 
the  American  Platonist,  issued  in  1909.  Professor  A.  B. 
Taylor's  recent  paper  on  Proclus,  in  the  "  Proceedings  of 
the  Aristotelian  Society,"  was  also  without  knowledge  of 
the  work  of  Johnson,  to  which  I  called  attention  in  The 
Hihhert  Journal  within  recent  years.  Ail  the  work  that 
is  done  upon  a  subject  should  be  known,  and  not  simply 
the  main  authorities,  or  there  is  apt  to  be  some  loss.  The 
point  is  worth  mentioning  because,  after  all,  Mr.  Whit- 
taker has  given  us  a  paraphrase,  not  a  translation,  as 
Johnson  has  done,  even  though  the  paraphrase  be  excel- 
lent, serving  many  of  the  purposes  of  a  translation.  Mr. 
Whittaker  seems  to  be  a  little  afraid  that  if  the  claims  of 
these  philosophers  to  be  constructive  thinkers  or  systema- 
tizing geniuses  be  emphasized,  their  claims  as  original  and 
independent  thinkers  are  thereby  being  lessened  or  ignored ; 
but  that  is  just  a  trifle  absurd,  since  their  claims  as  inde- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  37T 

pendeot  thinkers  have  sometimes  been  appreciated  where 
their  systematiziiig  skill  was  inadeqiiately  appreciated. 
The  treatment  of  Scholasticism  is  not  over  sympathetic, 
and  the  name  of  Albertus  Magnus  is  not  mentioned,  as  it 
should  have  been,  alongside  that  of  Roger  Bacon.  Besides, 
Bacon,  who  belonged  to  the  great  thirteenth  centary,  and 
whose  work  is  said  to  have  been  "  the  essential  thing,"  is 
only  mentioned  after  Ockham,  who  belonged  to  the  four- 
teenth century.  But,  in  whole,  the  historical  accounts  are 
interesting  and  good.  Mr.  Whittaker  is  somewhat  anti- 
theological  in  his  prepossessions,  —  a  circumstance  which, 
in  the  view  of  many,  is  no  advantage  to  his  discussion, 
particularly  in  relation  to  his  views  on  the  chief  infiuence 
of  Neo-Platonism  on  Christianity,  and  on  the  exaggerated 
value  put  forward  by  him  for  the  idealistic  Ontology  of 
Neo-Platonism. 

But  the  work  in  whole  is  good,  and  the  new  edition  is 
enriched  by  a  lengthy  appendix  on  Proclus,  not  the  least 
valuable  feature  of  the  work.  There  is  an  "  Index  of 
Names,"  but  it  would  have  been  a  good  thing  if  something 
of  the  nature  of  a  Bibliography  had  been  appended. 

Jambs  Lindsay 

Irvine,  Scotland 

Pbophecy  and  Authority  :  A  Study  in  the  History  of  the 
Doctrine  and  Interpretation  of  Scripture.  By  Kemper 
FuLLEBTON,  M.A.,  Profcssor  of  Old  Testament  Language 
and  Literature,  Oberlin  Graduate  School  of  Theology. 
12mo.  Pp.  xxi,  214.  New  York:  The  Macmillan  Com- 
pany.    1919.    fl.50. 

A  decided  merit  of  this  volume  is  the  fullness  and  im- 
partiality with  which  the  author  sets  forth  the  views  of 
those  with  whom  he  disagrees.  It  is  a  storehouse  of  in- 
formation regarding  the  opinions  of  the  early  Church  Fa- 
thers, and  of  Luther,  Calvin,  and  the  early  representatives 
of  the  Reformation,  concerning  Messianic  prophecy.  The 
conclusion  of  the  book  is  that  "  the  theory  of  Messianic 
prophecy  construed  as  prediction  must  be  abandoned " 
(p.   189),    and   that   the  grammatico-historical   sense  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


378  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [JnJj, 

prophecies  exhausts  their  meaning.  Professor  Fullerton 
gives  Galrin  full  credit  for  his  defense  of  the  granunatlco- 
historical  interpretation,  but  at  the  same  time  refnseB  to 
accept  the  Christocentric  theory  of  the  Bible,  which  Cal- 
vin defends  and  which  Professor  Fullerton  does  not  fail 
to  recognize.  He  declines,  however,  to  accept  that  fuller 
meaning  of  prophecy  which  implies  the  truth  of  the  gm- 
erally  accepted  doctrine  of  inspiration. 

It  is  not  difficult  to  show  that  the  early  Apostolic  Fa- 
thers pushed  their  theory  of  allegorical  interpretation  to 
extremes,  basing,  as  they  did,  their  defense  of  the  New 
Testament  on  the  literal  fulfillment  of  prophecies  relat- 
ing to  unessential  details  j  such  as,  that  Christ  shoold  be 
bom  in  Bethlehem,  and  should  ride  into  Jerusalem  on  the 
foal  of  an  ass,  and  should  be  bom  of  a  virgin,  and  should 
be  preceded  by  one  whose  career  was  like  that  of  the 
prophet  Elijah,  etc.  The  author  has  to  confess,  however, 
that  these  arguments  were  such  as  were  needed  by  that 
generation,  and  that  these  minute  coincidences  accom- 
plished the  purpose  of  establishing  faith  in  Christ's  Mes- 
siabship.  We  do  not  see  how,  as  a  good  Calvinist,  the 
author  can  fail  to  recognize  that  these  coincidences  were 
foreordained,  and  that  the  foreordination  was  justified  by 
the  results  accomplished  by  them.  It  would  be  an  ill- 
arranged  providence,  indeed,  that  did  not  pay  attention 
to  the  wants  of  mankind  in  their  primitive  stages  of  de- 
velopment. Furthermore,  it  should  be  kept  in  mind  that 
the  purpose  of  a  transaction  is  never  altogether  singular, 
but  is  composite.  It  was  fitting,  therefore,  not  only  that 
Christ  should  come  in  the  glory  of  his  Father,  but  that  he 
should  come  in  such  a  manner  and  under  snch  conditions 
that  his  own  generation  should  recognize  that  he  was  the 
Messiah  foretold  by  the  prophets;  thus  establishing  in 
their  minds  the  belief  in  the  unity  of  the  system  of  divine 
revelation  beginning  with  the  Mosaic  and  culminating  in 
the  Christian  dispensation. 

Much  of  the  reasoning  upon  the  subject  rests  upon  the 
author's  limited  view  of  Inspiration.     On  his  principles. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Noticeg  of  Recent  Publications  379 

"  the  Prophet  is  not  to  be  thought  of  as  uttering  enigmas 
whose  real  meaning  he  is  unable  to  comprehend  himself,  but 
as  preaching  profound  truths  the  significance  of  vhich  he 
is  intensel;  aware  of,  and  with  a  purpose  in  proclaiming 
them  which  is  immediate  and  moral.  .  .  .  This  centers  the 
attention  not  upon  the  hidden  meaning  of  his  prophecy, 
to  be  revealed  hundreds  of  years  later,  but  upon  the  obvious 
meaning  of  the  prophecy  for  the  time  in  which  it  was  de- 
livered" (pp.  192,  193).  It  is  natural  for  him,  therefore, 
to  speak  slightingly  of  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis,  as  he 
does  on  page  65.  Now  the  fact  is  that  the  correspondences 
between  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  and  the  revelations 
of  modem  science  are  so  many  and  so  minute  that  it  is 
impossible  to  believe  that  any  Jewish  writer  should  have 
had  any  adequate  conception  of  the  hidden  meaning  in- 
volved in  the  successive  statements  in  that  remarkable 
piece  of  literature.  No  other  cosmogony  in  the  world  be- 
gins to  approach  it  in  sublimity  and  in  ability  to  endure 
as  it  does  the  criticism  to  which  it  is  subjected  by  modem 
science.  Even  the  agnostic  Haeckel  is  forced  to  say  that 
"  its  extraordinary  success  is  explained  not  only  by  its 
close  connection  with  Jewish  and  Christian  doctrine,  but 
also  by  the  simple  and  natural  chain  of  ideas  which  run 
through  it.  .  .  .  Two  great  and  fundamental  ideas,  common 
also  to  the  non-miraculous  theory  of  development,  meet 
us  in  the  Mosaic  hypothesis  of  creation  with  surprising 
clearness  and  simplicity  —  the  idea  of  separation  or  dif- 
ferentiation, and  the  idea  of  progressive  development  or 
perfecting.  .  .  .In  his  [Hoses']  theory  there  lies  hidden  the 
ruling  idea  of  a  progressive  development  and  a  differen- 
tiation of  the  originally  simple  matter-  We  can  therefore 
bestow  our  just  and  sincere  admiration  on  the  Jewish  law- 
giver's grand  insight  into  nature,  and  his  simple  and  nat- 
ural hypothesis  of  creation  "  (Hist,  of  Creation,  vol.  i.  pp. 
37-38,  Eng.  trans.).  This  looks  very  much  like  the  recog- 
tion  of  an  enigma.  With  such  a  recognition  by  the  leading 
agnostic  of  the  present  time  we  are  not  surprised  to  find 
the  greatest  of  our  American  geologists.  Professor  James 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  303    8 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


380  BtftliotAeco  Bacra  [July, 

D.  Dana,  affirming  that  be  is  led  "  after  a  fair  ezamina- 
tion  of  the  narrative,  and  a  consideration  of  the  coinci- 
dences between  its  history  and  the  history  of  the  earth 
derived  from  nature,  to  admowledge  a  divine  origin  for 
both;  and  to  recognize  the  fact  that  in  this  Introductory 
chapter  its  divine  author  gives  the  fullest  endorsement  of 
the  Book  vhich  is  so  prefaced.  It  is  his  own  inscription 
on  the  Titie  Page"  (Bib.  Sac,  vol.  xliL  p.  224).  Thus  it 
would  seem  that  instancing  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  in 
proof  of  his  theory  of  inspiration  is  unfortunate  for  the 
author's  argument. 

Running  through  the  whole  of  Professor  Fullerton's 
treatment  of  the  subject  there  is  apparent  an  inadequate 
view  of  what  constitutes  proof.  It  would  seem  tiiat  he 
would  demand  demonstrative  proof  sach  as  we  have  in 
mathematics,  which  completely  answers  all  objections, 
before  he  would  accept  it  as  the  basis  for  belief.  But  it 
should  ever  be  k^t  in  mind  that  belief  is  not  absolute 
knowledge  such  as  ve  have  in  mathematics,  but  is  based 
upon  probability,  which  accepts  a  proposition  when  estab- 
lished beyond  "  reasonable  doubt,"  such  as  is  sufficient  in 
criminal  cases  to  condemn  a  man  to  death.  Calvin's 
recognition  of  the  difficulties  in  the  way  of  accepting  his 
theory  of  Messianic  prophecy,  so  fully  stated  by  the  author, 
is  an  interesting  case  in  hand.  The  theory  of  fulfillment 
of  Messianic  prophecies  pervading  the  New  Testament 
does  indeed  involve  many  difficulties  hard  to  explain ;  but 
the  theory  which  limits  the  design  of  the  prophecy  to  the 
knowledge  of  the  prophet  himself,  and  its  application  to 
the  generation  in  which  it  was  made,  involves  tar  greater 
difficnlties.  How  shall  we  account  for  that  growing  ex- 
pectation of  a  world's  deliverer  which  begins  with  the  an- 
nouncement in  Eden  of  the  "  seed  of  the  woman "  who 
should  bruise  the  head  of  the  old  Berpent  (Qen.  iii.  15) ; 
of  the  assurance  to  Abraham  that  in  his  seed  all  nations 
should  be  blessed  (Gen.  xii.  3  and  xviii.  18) ;  that  a  prophet 
greater  than  Moses  should  be  raised  up  (Dent,  xviii.  15)  ; 
that  a  king  should  arise  in  David's  line  whose  throne 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


191»]  Noticea  of  Recent  Publicationt  381 

Bbonld  be  established  fopever  (2  Sam.  vii,  12-16) ;  and, 
through  a  viaion  given  at  this  time  to  Micah,  that  a  de- 
liverance was  foretold  waiting  till  "  she  who  traveleth 
hath  bronght  forth,"  but  coining  then  in  glory  (Micah  v. 
3)  ?  And  how  is  it  possible  to  limit  to  the  prophet's  time 
the  mieaion  of  the  servant  who,  though  a  "  bruised  reed 
shall  he  not  break,  and  the  smoking  flax  shall  he  not 
quench,"  yet  "  he  shall  bring  forth  judgment  unto  truth," 
and  "  he  shall  not  fail  nor  be  discouraged,  till  he  have 
set  judgment  in  the  earth ;  and  the  isles  shall  wait  for 
his  law"  (Isa.  xlii.  3,  4,  A.  V.)?  And  how  is  it  possible 
to  limit  to  the  prophet's  time  the  mission  of  the  child 
to  be  bom  to  Israel  of  whom  it  is  said,  "  Tbe  government 
shall  be  upon  bis  shoulder;  and  his  name  shall  be  called 
Wonderful,  Counsellor,  Mighty  God,  Everlasting  Father, 
Prince  of  Peace  "  (Isa.  ii.  6)  ?  To  whom  but  to  the  Christ 
of  the  New  Testament  can  we  apply  the  touching  descrip- 
tion of  Isaiah  liii.,  where,  of  a  future  deliverer,  it  is  said, 
"  He  was  wounded  for  our  transgressions,  he  was  bruised 
for  our  iniquities ;  the  chastisement  of  our  peace  was  upon 
him ;  and  with  his  stripes  we  are  healed.  All  we  like  sheep 
have  gone  astray;  we  have  turned  every  one  to  his  own 
way;  and  the  Lord  bath  laid  on  him  the  iniquity  of  us 
all"?  "How  beautiful  upon  the  mountains  are  the  feet 
of  him  that  bringeth  good  tidings,  that  publisheth  peace, 
that  bringeth  good  tidings  of  good,  that  publisheth  salva- 
tion ;  that  saith  unto  Zion,  Thy  Ood  reiguetb.  .  .  .  The 
Lord  hath  made  bare  his  holy  arm  in  the  eyes  of  aU  the 
nations ;  and  all  the  ends  of  the  earth  shall  see  the  salva- 
tion of  our  God"  (Isa.  lii.  7-10).  Can  it  be  possible  to 
limit  this  vision  of  the  prophet  to  the  events  of  bis  own 
generation?  We  trow  not;  and  shall  continue  to  hold 
with  the  great  mass  of  Christian  believers,  that  all  history 
is  permeated  with  the  designs  of  tbe  Almighty,  who  num- 
bers the  hairs  of  our  head,  and  without  whose  notice  not 
a  sparrow  falls.  Nothing  is  too  small  to  be  related  to 
the  accomplishment  of  his  high  purposes.  With  Lord 
Bacon    we  are   constrained   to    regard    those    prophecies 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


882  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jnly, 

vhich  "  are  not  fulAlled  punctually  at  once "  to  "  have 
springing  and  germinant  accomplishment,  though  the 
height  and  fullness  thereof  may  r^er  to  some  one  age." 

HisTOEY  OP  Religions.  (International  Theological  Li- 
brary.) By  George  Foot  Moore,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Litt.D., 
Professor  of  the  History  of  Religion  in  Harvard  Uni- 
versity. II.  Judaism,  Christianity,  Uohammedanism. 
8vo.  Pp.  xvi,  552.  New  York:  Charles  Scribner's  Sons. 
1919.    f3.00,  net. 

The  story  of  the  three  monotheistic  religions  is  told  in 
this  volume  with  remarkable  completeness,  considering  the 
condensation,  and  with  rare  literary  skill.  In  writing  the 
history  of  Christianity  and  Mohammedanism  the  author 
skillfully  avoids  saying  anything  that  would  be  unduly 
offensive  to  any  school  of  critics  or  theologians,  while  at 
the  same  time  all  the  main  facts  are  brought  under  re- 
view. The  ordinary  reader,  however,  will  be  somewhat 
surprised  at  the  statements  concerning  Mohammedanism, 
that  "  a  single  verse  of  the  Koran  has  made  the  Moslem 
world  a  world  of  total  abstainers  has  not  a  shadow  of 
warrant  in  the  facts"  (p.  496) ;  and  that  in  Mohammedan 
countries  the  slaves  "  are  treated  as  members  of  the  house- 
hold and  feel  themselves  to  be  such;  so  that  the  institu- 
tion is  of  a  much  milder  form  than  slavery  in  the  Roman 
Empire  or  in  Christian  countries  like  America  in  modem 
times"  (p.  495). 

A  manifest  drawback  to  aU  such  condensed  histories 
for  popular  use  is  the  dogmatic  and  final  character  of  the 
statements  of  facts,  which  are  really  but  the  subjective 
conclosions  of  the  author,  and  which  in  a  large  majority 
of  cases  the  lay  reader  is  unable  4o  verify.  This  exists 
with  great  force  in  respect  to  the  portion  of  the  volume 
which  treats  of  Judaism,  where,  from  beginning  to  end, 
the  author  assumes  withont  question  the  correctness  of 
the  WeUhaasen  theory  which  maintains  the  documentary 
origin  of  the  Pentateuch.  Hence  the  history  ia  recon- 
structed throughout  on  the  basis  of  that  theory,  with  n» 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Jfotices  of  Recent  Publications  383 

intimation  that  anybody  questionB  the  truth.  Deuteron- 
omy is  repres^ited  as  a  forgery  of  the  seventh  century 
B.C.;  and,  that  not  being  sufficient^  several  portions  of  it 
which  assert  higher  conceptions  of  monotheism  than  the 
author  supposes  to  have  been  entertained  at  that  time  are 
said  to  be  later  additions.  Throughout  this  portion,  the 
author  seems  to  assume  that  the  failure  of  a  people  to  live 
up  to  a  high  standard  of  law  is  proof  that  the  law  did  not 
exist,  —  a  theory  which  has  received  a  serious  jolt  in  the 
European  war  just  concluded,  in  which  every  high  stand- 
ard of  morality  set  forth  by  Christianity  has  been  violated 
by  the  most  advanced  nations.  The  backslidings  of  the 
children  of  Israel  pale  in  significance  before  those  of  Ger- 
many during  the  last  five  years.  This  portion  of  the  book, 
therefore,  is  untrustworthy  from  beginning  to  end,  and  its 
statements  must  be  accepted  with  great  caution. 

A  Ststeh  op  Qbneral  Ethics.     By  Lbakdiir  8.  Exysbb, 
D.r>.,  Professor  of  Ethics,  Theism  and  Christian  Evi- 
dence in  Wittenberg  College,  and  of  Systematic  The- 
ology in  Hamma  Divinity  School,  Springfield,  Ohio;  au- 
thor of  "A  System  of  Natural  Theism,"  "A  System  of 
Christian  Ethics,"  "  The  Rational  Test,"  "  Election  and 
Conversion,"  etc.     12mo.    Pp.  286.     Burlington :  The  Lu- 
theran Literary  Board.     1918.    fl.75. 
This  littie  volume  supplies  a  deeply  felt  want  of  a  treat- 
ise upon  general  ethics  which  is  concise  and  comprehensive 
as  well  as  sound  ui  both  its  general  principles  and  its 
practical  applications.     It  ia  admirably  adapted  as  a  text- 
book in  our  colleges.    The  author  rightly  regards  man  as 
a  free  moral  agent,  responsible  for  his  character,  and  he 
estimates  a  virtuous  choice  as  weighing,  in  the  scale  of 
values,  more  than  the  material  universe.     Respecting  the 
ground  of  right,  the  author,  by  clear  and  concise  reason- 
ing, rejects  hedonism,  or  the  pleasure  theory  of  life;  sto- 
icism, which  maintains  that  we  are  to  practice  "  virtue 
for  virtue's  sake  " ;  divine  absolutism,  or  the  will  of  Ood ; 
civil  authority ;  altruism,  or  "  thinking  solely  of  others  " ; 
utilitarianism ;    naturalistic   and   theistic   evolution ;    and 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


881  Biblictheca  Sacra  [July^ 

gives  as  the  true  view  that  "  tlie  ultimate  ground  of  right 
is  God,  the  eternal,  personal,  self-existent  and  all-perfect 
Creator  and  Preserver  of  all  finite  being"  (p.  43).  The 
author,  however,  in  his  examination  of  various  theories, 
has  strangely  omitted  any  reference  to  the  theory  which 
has  been  ably  advocated  by  a  long  list  of  New  England 
divines,  namely,  Jonathan  Edwards,  Nathaniel  Taylor, 
Charles  G.  Finney,  Maii:  Hopkins,  and  James  FairchUd, 
who  represent  the  fundamental  virtue  to  be  the  "  choice 
of  the  good  of  being,"  which'  involves  all  being  from 
God  the  Creator  to  the  lowest  sentient  creature,  and  gives 
due  weight  to  one's  own  value  in  the  scale.  This  as  we 
understand  it  is  not  utilitarianism  or  altruism,  but  is  in 
effect  the  same  as  Dr.  KeyseHs  principle,  exalting  God  as 
supreme  and  regarding  the  universe  as  his  creation  and 
care.  In  the  author's  reasoning  upon  practical  ethics,  tliis 
principle  is  consistently  followed.  The  character  of  an 
action  is  determined  by  the  motive.  The  practical  judg- 
ment of  what  particular  action  is  rig^t  differs  with  the 
capacity  of  each  individual.  Each  one  is  held  responsible 
for  adhering  to  bis  ultimate  choice.  "  If  we  are  sincere, 
and  yet  fall  into  error,  we  may  well  believe  that  God  will 
overrule  our  mistakes  for  our  ultimate  good"  {p.  133). 
Many  perplexing  questions  of  casuistry  arise,  especially  in 
regard  to  doubtful  amusements  and  debatable  indulgences. 
These  questions  should  be  settled  not  simply  by  asking, 
What  is  there  wrong  in  them?  but  by  the  other  question, 
What  is  good  in  them  ?  In  discussing  the  question  of  false- 
hood, the  author  would  justify  the  conscientious  physician 
in  disguising  certain  facts  a  knowledge  of  which  would  en- 
danger his  patient's  life;  or  a  general  in  war  counterfeit- 
ing certain  movements  to  deceive  the  enemy;  or  football 
players  adopting  certain  ruses  to  win  the  game.  "  It  is  the 
motive  more  than  anything  else  that  makes  the  lie"  (p. 
138).  And  so  one  would  reason  that  murder  was  not 
simply  killing  a  man,  but  killing  with  a  bad  motive.  But 
In  all  questions  of  casuistry  "  it  is  better  to  err,  if  err  you 
must,  on  the  side  of  safety  —  that  is,  on  the  side  of  strict 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  385 

veracity"  (p.  138).  The  diBCUSSion  of  practical  ethics 
which  occnpiea  the  last  115  pages  of  the  book,  is  both 
diBcriminating  and  vholesome.  No  youth  can  go  astray 
through  following  its  precepts. 

CoNCBBNiNQ  Jb8U3  Chhist,  the  SoD  of  God.    By  William 

Cleavxb    Wilkinson.    12mo.    Pp.     233.    Philadelphia; 

The  Griffith  and  Rowland  Press.    fl.OO. 

Dr.  Wilkinson,  whose  trenchant  pen'  has  wrought  val- 
iantly for  the  truth  heretofore,  makes  with  this  volume 
another  strong  essay  into  the  field  of  Apologetics.  He 
speaks  of  it  almost  in  the  light  of  a  final  effort  —  praying 
for  grace,  "  until  I  have  shown  thy  strength  unto  this 
generation  and  thy  power  to  every  one  that  is  to  come." 
We  trust  it  is  not  the  finale,  though  a  worthy  theme  for 
such,  for  the  theological  world  will  be  much  bereft  with- 
out the  voice  of  this  doughty  champion  of  orthodoxy. 

The  plea  here  is  for  a  fair  and  reasonable  survey  of  the 
facts  of  Christ's  life  and  the  declarations  of  his  lips.  Such 
a  common-sense  study  of  the  data  at  hand  will  bring  to 
the  rational  mind  the  clear  conception  of  a  Christ  who 
is  both  human  and  divine,  and  so  equal  to  the  mighty  task 
laid  upon  him  of  redeeming  a  lost  world  to  Qod.  He  in- 
veighs particularly  against  that  posture  of  mind  which 
sees  Jesus  shorn  of  miraculous  power  and  yet  assumes  him 
competent  to  be  Master  and  Saviour  of  mankind.  It  is  the 
Eesurrection  that  is  the  Verdun  of  the  conflict;  tind  here 
the  author  takes  his  stand,  plants  his  guns,  and  sturdily 
says,  "  They  shall  not  pass."  His  argument  is  simple  and 
sensible  but  strongly  convincing.  Jesus  is  what  he  claims 
to  be,  and  only  as  such  is  he  capable  of  doing  what  he  was 
sent  to  do.  The  very  persistence  of  the  religion  of  Jesus 
declares  daily  and  indubitably,  "  Now  is  Christ  risen 
from  the  dead." 

If  it  is  Paul  who  lays  especial  emphasis  upon  the  res- 
urrection of  Christ,  it  is  to  John  we  must  look  for  the  con- 
vincing testimony  to  Christ's  deity;  and  Dr.  Wilkinson, 
in  the  writer's  recollection,  is  the  first  one  who  has  called 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


386  BihUotheca  Sacra  [July, 

attention  to  the  Tindoabted  influence  of  Mary  the  mother 
of  Jesus  upon  Joiui's  remarkable  portraiture  of  Christ's 
theanthropic  personality,  following  the  quietly  spoken 
word  on  the  cross,  "  Woman,  behold  thy  son."  The  divol- 
gences  of  those  days  of  close  r^tionsfaip  are  reflected,  it 
mast  be  believed,  in  the  intimate  loner  story  of  Christ's 
transcendent  life  given  in  John's  Oospel. 

J.  W.  WmoDrntL. 

Bbsadino  thb  Biblh.  By  Williau  Lyok  Fhklps,  Lampsou 
Professor  of  English  Literature  at  Yale.  12mo.  Pp.  vii, 
131.  New  York:  The  Macmillan  Company.  1919.  fl.25. 
It  is  refreshing  to  get  the  estimate  of  the  Bible  made 
by  a  distinguished  professor  of  English  in  one  of  oar 
leading  universities,  and  to  find  that  he  is  emphatic  in 
his  opinion  that  the  literature  of  the  Bible  as  found  in 
the  Authorized  Version  surpasses  in  every  respect  every 
and  all  other  writings  which  the  world  possesses.  The 
book  contains  three  chapters,  — "  Beading  the  Bible,"  "  St. 
Paul  as  a  Letter-Writer,"  "  Short  Stories  in  the  Bible." 
Every  page  of  the  book  is  full  of  interest.  The  author  says 
that,  not  being  a  student  of  theology  and  Biblical  criti- 
cism, he  hesitates  to  express  an  opinion  upon  any  critical 
point.  Nevertheless,  the  opinions  which  he  does  express, 
usually  commend  themselves  for  their  good  sense  and  con- 
clusiveness. To  those  who  doubt  the  Pauline  authorship 
of  the  Epistles  to  Timothy  and  to  Titus  we  commend  the 
following : — 

"  Ignorant  of  New  Testament  interpretation  as  I  am, 
it  would  be  an  impertinence  for  me  to  express  an  opinion 
upon  this  point.  All  I  can  say  is,  I  am  glad  we  have  them, 
and  I  hope  Paul  wrote  them.  .  .  .  The;  differ  in  langoage 
from  the  known  epistles  of  Paul;  but  it  is  possible  that 
Paul,  like  some  other  writers,  occasionally  went  outside 
of  his  customary  vocabulary"  (p.  88).  "I  confess  with- 
out shame  that  the  reason  why  I  hope  they  were  written 
by  Paul  ia  not  because  of  their  admonitions  but  simply 
because  of  their  personal  allusions,  which  bring  the  great 
writer  verj-  close.  .  .  .  Paul  wants  his  overcoat.  ...  He  is 
not  only  cold,  he  is  lonely.  ,  .  .  But  above  all,  he  wants  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  387 

see  Timothj  again,  aad  twice  he  implores  him  to  hurry 
op"  (pp.  89-90). 

How  THE  BiBLK  Ghbw  :  The  Story  ae  Told  by  the  Book  and 
Its  Keepers.     (Handbooks  of  Ethics  and  Religion.)     By 
Frank  Grant  Lewis.    8vo.    Pp.  xi,  223.    Chicago;  The 
University  of  Chicago  Press.     1919.     fl.50,  net. 
This  volume  is  devoted  from  beginning  to  end  to  popu- 
larizing the  documentary  theories  of  the  WeUhaasen  school 
as  applied  to  the  Old  Testament,  and  of  the  moderately 
radical  critics  of  the  New  Testament.   It  gives  no  indication 
of  the  writer's  familiarity  with  the  more  recent  discus- 
sions relating  to  the  authorahip  of  the  Pentateuch  or  of 
the  most  recent  conclusions   concerning  the   date  of  the 
writing  of  the  New  Testament  books.    There  is  scarcely 
a  single  reference  to  a  conservative  author.  The  lay  reader, 
therefore,  will  find  it  a  blind  guide  to  the  real  truth. 

Thb  Adventueb  of  Lipb.   By  Bobbrt  W.  Mackbnna,  M.A., 

M.D.,  author  of  "  The  Adventure  of  Death."   12mo.   Pp. 

xi,  233.     New  York:  The  Macmillan   Company.     1919. 

«1. 25. 

The  distinguished  author  of  this  volume  has  conferred 
a  great  boon  upon  the  mass  of  readers  by  producing  a 
book  which,  while  neither  a  scientific  monograph  nor  a 
philosophical  treatise,  has  yet  made  the  facts  of  such  pro- 
ductions easily  comprehended  by  all.  From  beginning  to 
end  the  book  elicits  the  interest  of  all,  though  discussing 
the  profound  opinions  under  consideration.  Written  while 
engaged  in  the  humanitarian  profession  at  the  seat  of  war, 
his  subjects  are  constantly  enlivened  and  clarified  by  the 
experiences  of  the  eick  and  wounded  soldiers  that  were 
brought  under  his  care.  Duly  recognizing  alj  the  scientific 
objections  that  have  been  presented,  the  author  still 
clearly  makes  it  an  object  of  firm  belief  that  life  is  the 
gift  of  an  omnipotent  Creator;  that  the  intelligence  of 
man  sets  him  apart  from  all  other  animals;  that  freedom 
of  will  is  among  the  powers  bestowed  upon  him  by  his 
Creator;  that  the  mystery  of  pain  and  suffering  are  re- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


388  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Jolyi 

Bolved  into  benevolence  throng^  the  services  whicb  they 
render  in  directing  oar  activities  and  in  ennobling  than 
by  making  them  serve  hi^  parposee  which  greatly  enlarge 
the  value  of  life.  The  volume  closes  with  a  brief  statement 
of  the  grounds  of  believing  in  immortality,  though  the  sub- 
ject had  been  treated  more  fully  in  his  previous  work  on 
"  The  Adventure  of  Death."  The  book  merits  wide  reading. 

Thb  Nbw  Citizenship:  The  Christian  Facing  a  New  World 
Order.  By  A.  T.  Hobbbtson,  M.A.,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Pro- 
fessor of  New  Testament  Interpretation,  Southern  Bap- 
tist Theological  Seminary,  Louisville,  Ky.  12mo.  Pp. 
157.  New  York:  Fleming  H.  Revell  Company.  1919. 
11.00,  net. 

This  volume  is  the  outgrowth  of  "  the  reaction "  of  a 
distinguished  scholar's  "  mind  to  the  new  situation  due 
partly  to  a  month  with  the  Y.  M.  C.  A.  Army  school  for 
secretaries  at  Blue  Ridge,  North  Carolina";  and  as  such 
it  demands  candid  and  careful  attention.  It  brings  out  in 
striking  relief  the  importance  of  Christian  cooperation  in 
the  profound  readjustment  of  society  made  necessary  by 
the  war,  and  the  confidence  which  we  may  have  in  the  suc- 
cessful outcome  of  the  efforts  to  promote  permanent  peace 
and  fellowship. 

The  Luooaoe  of  Life.    The  Silvbb  8haik>w.    Thb  Oolobn 

Milestone.    Faces   m   thb   Fire.     Mushroous   on   the 

Moor.    Mountains  in  the  Mist.    By  F.  W.  Bobbhah. 

12mo.    Pp.  246,  272,  276,  272,  280,  2^.    New  York:  The 

Abingdon  Press,    fl.25,  net,  each  volume. 

The  author  of  these  books  is  an  Australian  preacher 

whose  works  are  well  known  in  that  country.  The  sketches 

and  essays  in  all  these  boobs  are  of  a  similar  character. 

They  have  a  fine  literary  flavor.     They  are  entertaining. 

Moreover,  they  are  instructive  and  inspiring.    One  can 

easily  see  why  the  author  has  become  a  popular  preacher 

and  lecturer.    His  wealth  of  illustration,  his  historical  and 

biographical  touches  have  a  peculiar  charm.     These  are 

books  that  one  may  pick  up  at  odd  times,  open  up  aoy- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  389 

where,  and  find  them  always  equally  interesting.  One 
would  like  to  have  heard  the  spoken  message.  But  unlike 
many  other  similar  sketches,  these  sketches  have  lost  little 
in  being  transposed  into  the  cold  print.  The  variety  of 
the  subjects  will  furnish  material  for  any  mood. 

N.  T.  d.  p. 

The  Traobdy  of  Abmbnia  :  A  Brief  Study  and  Interpreta- 
tion. By  Bbrtha  S.  Papazian.  With  an  Introduction 
by  Secretary  Jaubs  L.  Barton,  D.D.,  of  the  American 
Board.   12mo.  Pp.  xvi,  164.  Boston:  The  PUgrim  Press. 

1918.  fl.OO. 

This  book  is  valuable,  not  only  for  detailing  the  effects 
of  the  recent  massacres,  but  for  giving  an  outline  of  the 
history  of  the  Armenians  from  their  emergence  from  pa- 
ganism into  the  fellowship  of  Ohristian  nations.  It  sheds 
much  lights  also,  upon  the  Turkish  domination  and  the 
whole  Near  Eastern  question. 

Pbaybrs  and  Thanksgivinos  foe  a  Christian.  By  Isaac 
OoDEN  Rankin.   16mo.  Pp.  306.  Boston:  Pilgrim  Press. 

1919.  fl.25,  net. 

This  is  a  most  helpful  collection  of  prayers  for  every  day 
and  for  many  different  occasions.  Each  prayer  centers 
aroand  one  particular  thought  The  language  is  both 
beautiful  and  devotional.  For  family  worship  a  little  book 
like  this  will  be  just  what  many  have  desired.  The  fine 
thing  about  all  these  prayers  is  the  loftiness  of  them.  They 
may  be  heartily  commended  to  all  who  are  seeking  a  devo- 
tional expression  for  their  individual  and  their  family  life. 

The  Sunday-School  Cbnturt:  Containing  a  History  of 
the  Congregational  Sunday-School  and  Publishing  So- 
ciety.    By  Rev.  William  Ewing,  D.D.     12mo.     Pp.  xvi, 
141.    Boston :  The  Pilgrim  Press.    1918.    |1.50. 
The  rise  of  Sunday  schools  in  the  United  States  briefly 
told,  followed  by  a  more  detailed  account  of  Sunday-school 
actirities  of  the  Congregational  Church.  Emphasis  is  given 
to  the  organizations  that  have  provided  the  polity,  curric- 
ula, literature,  and  extension  of  school  system.  Those  who 


jdovGoOt^lc 


S90  BibHotheca  Sacra 

have  superintended  this  work  are  all  introdaced,  togethier 
with  pliotographB  of  seventy  of  them.  The  book  is  fall  of 
facts  and  flgnres  for  those  interested. 

HORB  FROM  TEOB  HUNTINOTON  PALIMPSEST 
Since  the  publication  of  Mr.  Buchanan's  article  in  the 
BiBLioTHBCA  Sacra  for  January,  1917,  giving  lengthy  por- 
tions of  the  Huntington  palimpsest,  additional  portiooB 
have  been  published  by  C.  F.  Roworth,  88  Fetter  Lane, 
London,  E.  C,  containing  extracts  from  the  Gospel  of  Lake 
and  from  John  and  from  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles.  These 
fill  from  forty  to  fifty  pages  each  and  are  marked  by  tbe 
same  characteristics  as  were  apparent  in  the  portions  pub- 
lished in  tbe  Bibliothbca  Sacra.  There  has  also  been 
published  by  Heath,  Cranton  and  Ousley  "An  Unique  Gos- 
pd  Text,"  containing  thirty-one  selections  from  the  same 
palimpsest,  with  introduction  by  B.  E.  Scriven  and  J.  B. 
Heath  Cranton.  The  point  of  special  significance  is  that 
in  all  these  portions  extreme  emphasis  is  laid  upon  the 
work  of  the  "  Spirit."  Mr.  Buchanan  is  of  the  opinion 
that  this  palimpsest  represents  an  early  Latin  text  which 
was  circulated  in  Spain;  but,  as  we  have  already  noted, 
Oanon  Wordsworth  is  of  the  opinion  that  it  is  what  he 
calls  "  a  tai^med  copy,"  prepared  by  some  sect  of  which 
we  know  little  or  nothing.  But  even  so  it  is  of  great  in- 
terest both  as  illustrating  the  ferment  produced  by  Chris- 
tion  doctrines  in  the  churches  of  western  Europe  in  the 
early  centuries,  and  also  of  value  in  helping  to  correct  the 
text  of  disputed  passages.  For  some  reason  Mr.  Buchan- 
an's work  upon  this  manuscript  has  been  suspended.  We 
trust,  however,  that  tbe  way  will  soon  tie  opened  for  tbe 
completion  of  his  work,  which  is  of  great  interest  and 
value,  whatever  opinion  we  may  have  of  the  original  char- 
acter of  the  palimpsest. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


The  Bible  Champion 

Offieial  Organ  of  the  Bible  League  of  North  America 

FOBMKBLT   THB   AHBBICAN    BI8LB    LBAGUB 

An  Ot^aoisaiioD  formed  (a  promoU  ■  true  knowledge  of  the  Bible 
aod  coiwequeni  faith  in  ita  Diviae  Authority 

A  magazine  for  the  Minister,  Bible  Student,  and  the  aspiring  Layman. 

Iq  ita  New  Form  —  greatly  improved  and  ^larged  —  there  is  do 
magazine  published  to-day  that  gives  greater  value  for  the  investment 
made.  We  wish  to  prove  this  strong  claim  made  for  the  Biblb  Ghau- 
piON  to  every  reader  of  the  Biiliotheca  Sacra. 

Dr.  Townsend's  monthly  contributions  consist  of  an  article  on  Hy- 
giene, primarily  for  Clergj-nien,  but  equally  eulightening  to  the  Laity; 
and  a  series  of  very  iutereBting  articles  on  the  "  Origin  of  Man,  and  its 
Bearing  on  the  Theory  of  Evolution."     You  will  do  well  to  read  these! 

The  price  of  the  Bible  Chami'ion  is  fl.fiO  the  year;  Canada,  |1.65; 
Foreign,  $1.75 ;  Single  copy,  15c.  It  is  the  policy  of  the  Publishers  not 
to  send  free  sample  copies. 

OR,  if  you  will  inclose  the  price  of  a  year's  subscription  we  will 
send  you  a  volume,  cloth,  of  Dr.  Esenwein's  "  Feathers  for  Shafts,"  free, 
prepaid,  as  a  Premium. 

OR,  send  us  the  price  of  a  year's  subscription,  and  add  50c  to  it, 
and  get  any  one  of  the  cloth  bound  books  below,  prepaid: — 

"Concessions  of  Liberalista  to  Orthodoxy"  (344  pp.,  $1.50),  by 
Dr.  DorchcBter;  or,  "Christianity  and  I'oaitivism"  (370  pp.,  fl.75),  by 
President  McCosh;  or,  "Footprints  of  Sorrow"  (373  pp.,  |1.50),  by 
Dr.  Beld;  or,  "Voices  of  the  Soul  Answered  in  God"  (374  pp.,  $1.50), 
by  Dr.  Reid:  or,  "Christ  and  His  Religion"  (311  pp.,  $1-50),  by  Dr. 
Reid.  For  |2.00  we  will  send  you  any  one  of  above  volumes  and  the 
Biblb  Chami'ion  a  year,  prepaid.     (Canada,  ¥2.15;  Foreign,  $2.25.) 

JAY  BENSON  HAMILTON,  D;D.,   Editor 
24  East  125th  Street,  New  York  City 

ASSOCIATE    SniTOBS 

David  James  Burrell,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  William  H.  Bates,  D.D.,  Herbert  W. 

Magoun,  I'h.D.,  liiitlicr  T.  Townseud,  D.D.,  LL.D., 

0.  Frederick  Wright,  p.D.,  LL.D. 

Address  all  Orders,  and  mail  on  matters  of  Business,  to 
FRANK  ].  BOYER 
Managing  Editor  and  Publisher,  Reading,  Pa. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE  WRITINGS  OF 

MR.  HAROLD  M.  WIENER, 

marking  an  epoch  In  Pentateuehal 
Criticism,  b&ve  nearly  all  appeared 
in  tbe  BiBuaTBiio&  Saoka  during 
the  last  fifteen  jeara.  In  "  Essays  In 
PentateaohB]  CrlUcism  "  and  "  P«ita- 
teuehal  Studies,"  most  of  the  articles 
before  1912  are  collected.  Since  then, 
no  number  has  been  without  some 
contribution  from  bis  pen.  His  con- 
structive work  besan  In  the  Janaary 
number,  1918,  and  after  an  Interrup- 
tion because  of  the  war  was  resumed 
in  the  current  numbers.  Owing  to  the 
high  coat  of  printing  it  is  not  expe- 
dient at  present  to  issue  further  vol- 
umes collecting  these  essays,  but  lib- 
eral terms  for  back  numbers  of  the 
BiBuoTHKCA  Sacra  will  be  made  to 
the  large  number  of  Biblical  etud^its 
for  whom  these  writings  are  a  neces- 
sity If  they  would  keep  up  wltli  tbe 
times.    Correspondence  la  solicited. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc         ..' 


Vol.  LXXVI 


OCTOBER,  1919 


BIBLIOTHECA  S 

Eishty-Ninth  Year 


BDITOR 

G.  FREDERICK  WRIGHT 


JAUES  UNDSAY,  CBAXLES  F.  THWING^  A.  A.  BSKLB^  WILUAK  B.  BAB10N 

HENKY  A.  STIHSON,  HBKBERT  W.   UAOOVS,  AZASIAB  B.  KOOT 

MELVIN  G.  KYLE,  W.  H.  GRIFFTTB  THOUAS 

GBOBGE  E.  HALL 


Tbb  Cbxativx  Days ■    .     L.  Franklin  Gruber  391 

Thb  DmNB  Transcerdence David  Fotter  Eitea  415 

Thb  Philosopht  of  Pbohibitioh Ohartei  W.  Super  434 

The  ViCTOBions  Life  (11.) W,  S.  OrtJl(ft  Thomat  4B5 

Criticai.  Notk8 — 

The  Elxodus  and  the  Conquest  ot  the  Negeb — Not«B  on  the  Ezodua 

—The  Text  of  Exodus  xvill.  10  f.     .     .     ,     Harold  M.  Wiener  4GS 

Notices  of  Recent   Pubuoatiohb 4S5 

IKIIEZ EOS 


BIBLIOTHEGA  SACRA  COMPANY 

OBERLIN,  OHIO,  U.  S.  A. 

BuiopKAH  Aqchts,  Ckaklbb  Hiohah  ft  Son 
27a  F^rrlngdon  Street.  London,  B.  C. 


SIIMLE   NUMBER,  7B   CENTS 


YKARLY  SUBSCRIPTION,  MJ» 


Entered  &t  the  Fovt  Oflloe  In  Oborlln.  Ohio,  u  Seeond-elaai  UaXbu 

D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


BIBLIOTHECA   SACRA 

OLDEST  THEOLOGICAL  QUARTERLt' 
IN  AMERICA 


EDITOR 

G.  FREDERICK  WRIGHT 

In  1813  BiBLioTHRCA  Sacka  was  founded  by  Dr.  Edward  Robinson, 
and  three  numbero  were  iBHned  in  New  York  City.  In  1844  it  was  re- 
moved to  Andover,  MaBRaclinsetts,  where  the  publication  of  the  present 
series  began,  iiuder  the  editorsliip  of  I'rofesxors  Bela  B.  Edwards  and 
Edwards  A.  Park,  with  the  special  cooperation  of  Dr.  Robinson  and  Pro- 
fessor Moses  Stuart.  Professor  Edwards  A.  Park  continued  as  its 
principal  editor  until  the  close  of  its  fortieth  volume  (1883).  8ince 
that  tiine  Professor  G.  Frederick  Wright  has  been  its  leading  editor, 
and  with  representative  associate  editors  has  continued  the  Quarterly 
in  the  line  of  its  original  projectors.  Never  in  all  its  history  has  it  had 
a  wider  or  abler  set  of  contributors  than  it  has  at  the  present  tima 

Recent  numbers  of  Bibi.jotheca  I^acra  Iiave  contained  articles  by 
W.  H.  Bates,  J.  T.  Bixby,  Raymond  Bridgman,  E.  S.  Buchanan,  J.  H. 
Crooker,  D-  F-  Estes,  O.  W.  Firkins,  J.  F.  Genung,  Andrew  Gillies,  L.  F. 
Gruber,  F.  H.  Johnson,  M.  G.  Kyle,  A.  H.  Lybyer,  D.  A.  MeClenahan,  H. 
W.  Magoun,  P.  S.  Moxom,  H.  M;  Ramsey,  D.  S.  Bchaff,  Preser\'ed  Smith, 
C.  W.  Super,  W.  H.  G.  Thomas,  B.  B.  Warfleld,  J.  D.  Wilson,  J.  E.  Wis- 
hart,  and  many  other  equally  well-known  names. 

Among  European  scholars  may  be  mentioned  A.  Noordtzij  and  A. 
Troelstra,  of  The  Netherlands;  J.  Dahse  and  E.  Konig  of  Germany; 
W.  St.  Clair  TisdaU,  J.  J.  Lias,  J.  S.  Griffiths,  G.  Margoliouth,  J.  Lind- 
say, T.  H.  Weir,  and  H.  M,  Wiener  of  Great  Britain.  By  general  ac- 
knowledgment of  European  seliolars  the  work  of  these  men  has  put  a- 
new  phase  on  Old  Testament  Criticism." 

The  January  number  for  1920  will  have  articles  by  F.  M.  Th.BOhl 
(GroniDgen),  E.  Konig,  and  H.  M,  Wiener. 

Single  Numbers,  75  cents.      Yearly  Subscription,  fS.W) 

BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA  COMPANY 
Oberlin,  Omo,  U.  S.  A, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


BIBLIOTHECA  SACRA 


THE  CKEATIVE  DATS" 

THE   BBVIIBIIND   U.   rBANKUN  QBUBSB^  DJ>. 
BT.  PAUL,  HINNBSOTA 

Onb  of  the  Btorm-centerB  of  the  apparent  conflict  be- 
tween science  and  Revelation  has  for  yeare  been  the 
opening  chapter  of  the  Book  of  Qenesia.  With  the  devel- 
opment especially  of  modem  physical  science,  the  Hoeaic 
account  of  creation  became  the  object  of  many  attacks,  as 
sapposedly  antiquated  or  outworn  and  no  longer  intel- 
lectually tenable.  Thia  citadel  of  the  Faith  has  thus  for 
some  decades  been  bombarded  with  the  missiles  of  the 
most  highly  developed  scientific  acumen.  Terms  for  an 
armistice  have  indeed  been  offered,  and  compromises  look- 
ing toward  concord  and  permanent  peace  have  been 
snggested.  But  these  have  never  been  entirely  satisfactory 
to  either  side.  Meanwhile  on  each  side  there  have  been 
those  who  have  opposed  every  compromise.  They  have 
remained  fixed  in  their  determination  to  continue  the 
conflict  with  their  original  weapons,  without  even  so  much 
as  a  willingness  to  examine  the  weapons  of  the  other 
party.  As  this  is  a  subject  of  undoubted  importance  in 
these  times  of  speculation  and  doubt,  the  following  brief 
consideration  of  the  Creative  Hexaemeron  may  not  be 
wholly  amiss  and  unwelcome. 

Speculation  upon  this  question  has  not  been  confined 
altogether  to  our  own  age.  In  practically  every  age  phi- 
losophers and  theologians  discnssed  it.  In  the  speculative 
thought  of  all  races  the  questions  of  the  whence,  how,  whbn, 
and  why  of  origin  have  been  second  only  to  that  of  the 
wMther  of  destiny.    Thus  many  theories  of  creation  have 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


892  BihUotheoa  Baora  [Oct 

been  developed.  Bnt  as  this  is  a  eabject  that  lies  beyond 
the  range  of  human  coasciouaness  and  ezperieoce,  unoi- 
lightened  reason  alone  coold  never  solve  these  transc^i- 
dent  mysteries  of  ori^.  This  would  seem  to  be  as 
impossible,  without  revealed  facts  or  premises  of  reasoning, 
as  for  a  man  to  weigh  himself  while  holding  his  own  scale. 
Here  man's  profonndest  speculations  fail,  and  unaided 
human  reason  must  halt  with  bowed  head  and  veiled  face 
before  the  divinely  imposed  limitation,  "  80  far  shalt  thoa 
go  but  no  farther." 

I.      Two    SOUBCBS    OF    INFOBMATION 

Man  is,  however,  not  thus  left  to  himself  without  light, 
as  to  these  absorbing  questions.  As  if  to  anticipate  man's 
burning  desire  to  know  about  his  origin,  for  his  "  O  my 
Father"  of  inquiry  there  is  the  long  anticipated  revealed 
answer,  "  Here,  my  child." 

I.   THR  VOLDHB  OF  BnVELATION 

The  account  of  creation  in  G«nesis  has  always  been  re- 
garded as  of  divine  origin.  It  seems  to  bear  upon  its  very 
face  the  stamp  of  Divinity.  And  only  in  proportion  as 
other  accounts,  however  we  may  explain  their  origin,  have 
been  found  to  approach  this  one  in  Scripture,  have  they 
been  r^arded  as  containing  elements  of  truth.  Fitting  it 
is,  therefore,  that  this  record  of  man's  and  nature's  origin 
forme  the  introduction  to  the  revelation  of  his  state  and 
destiny.  And,  in  the  main,  this  account  of  creation  was 
for  centuries  accepted  with  implicit  faith  as  Ood's  one  and 
final  revelation  to  man  on  this  important  topic. 

Many  great  and  reverent  men  saw  indeed  some  ditScol- 
ties  of  interpretation,  such  as  the  creative  days  consisting 
each  of  an  evening  and  a  morning,  the  creation  of  light  and 
of  the  earth  before  that  of  the  sun,  the  existence  of  plants 
before  sunlight,  and  the  fact  that  to  God's  rest-day  was 
assigned  no  evening.  But,  being  profoundly  devout,  these 
men  regarded  such  diificulties  as  only  philosophically 
profound  and  thus  merely  apparent.  Indeed,  by  some  men 
like  Augustine  ;thls  whole  narrative  was  regarded  as  not 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creative  Days  893 

an  ordinary  one,  and  therefore  beyond  any  explanation 
according  to  ordinary  canons  of  interpretation  and  in 
merely  human  terms  and  times.  And  in  thia  conclusion 
might  devoutest  faith  veil  hare  rested  and  been  satisfied. 
Han  might  reverently  have  allowed  the  record  to  stand  as 
God's  final  inspired  chronicle  of  His  own  work  of  creation. 
For  as  Ood's  work  most  be  above  man's  work  as  high  as 
the  heavens  are  above  the  earth,  so  might  man  well  have 
regarded  Ood's  record  of  the  same  as  being  above  or  dif- 
ferent from  merely  human  records. 

II.   THB  VOLUMB  OF  NATUBB  AND  ITS  RELATION 
TO  THAT  OF  REVELATION 

There  is,  however,  another  volume  of  truth  open  to  man. 
In  addition  to  the  volume  of  Ood's  Word,  there  is  the 
volume  of  His  completed  work.  Indeed,  Ood's  work  in 
nature  is  the  great  outstanding  visible  fact  of  whose  origi- 
nation the  account  in  Genesis  is  apparently  the  divinely 
inspired  record.  And  the  record  must  correspond  to  the 
fact,  or  the  fact  to  the  record.  If  both  are  from  God, 
they  must  agree ;  for  all  divine  truth,  whatever  its  habitat, 
must  be  consistent  with  all  other  and  related  truth.  Thus 
God's  truth  as  to  His  creation  comes  to  us  in  two  volumes ; 
namely,  the  book  of  nature  and  the  book  of  Revelation. 
They  are  complements  of  each  other  and  are  therefore  both 
necessary  to  the  better  understanding  of  this  great  subject. 
Taken  in  the  order  of  the  time  of  interpretation  rather 
than  in  that  of  their  origins,  there  is  a  sense  in  which  the 
relation  of  the  volume  of  Revelation  to  the  volume  of  na- 
ture is  like  that  of  prophecy  to  history,  of  the  Old  Testa- 
ment to  the  New  Testament.  As  prophecy  is  to  a  certain 
extent  intelligible  without  history,  or  the  Old  Testam^t 
without  the  New  Testament,  so  the  account  in  Ood's  volume 
of  Revelation  is  also  somewhat  intelligible  without  God's 
volume  of  nature.  But  as  history  is  the  key  to  the  better 
'  understanding  of  prophecy,  or  the  New  Testament  to  that 
of  the  Old  Testament,  so  God's  book  of  nature  is  the  key 
to  the  better  understanding  of  the  account  in  Ood's  book  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


394  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

BevelatioQ.  And  as  prophecy  is  to  a  certain  extent  also  the 
key  to  the  onderstanding  of  the  purpose  of  history,  bo  also 
is  the  account  in  Oenesis  the  key  to  the  onderstandiog  of 
the  purpose  of  nature.  The  failure  to  recognize  this  rela- 
tionship between  nature  and  Genesis  has  been  one  of  the 
chief  causes  of  the  conflict  between  science,  in  the  wider 
sense,  and  religion. 

III.   APPABBNT  CONFUCT  OP  INTERPRBTATION 

Modem  science  has  wonderfully  enlarged  man's  concep- 
tion of  the  greatness  of  physical  creation,  and  therefore,  to 
the  devout,  also  of  its  Creator.  She  has  compelled  nature 
to  yield  mtiny  secrets.  But  with  her  marvelous  devdop- 
ment  there  has  also  been  developed  the  feeling  of  her  own 
sufficiency  in  the  resolution  of  problems  not  distinctive^ 
her  own.  With  the  suggestion  of  the  account  of  creation 
in  Genesis,  she  has  prondly  attempted  to  construct  one  of 
her  own,  virtually  without  the  factor  of  Deity,  out  of  the 
apparent  evidence  from  nature  itself.  But  in  so  doing  she 
has  erroneonsly  proceeded  as  if  she  knew  all  the  forces 
that  have  been  operative  in  the  development  of  universal 
nature.  She  has  indeed  laid  bare  many  of  nature's  mys- 
teries, but  for  every  one  laid  bare  she  has  found  beneath  it 
several  others,  and  each  still  more  mysterious, — and  so  on 
in  a  geometrical  ratio.  And  where  she  has  come  back  to 
Scripture  to  Illustrate  her  findings,  it  has  been  with  the 
prepossession  that  her  own  findings  must  be  final,  and  that 
where  they  do  not  agree  with  Scripture  upon  its  very 
surface,  there  Scripture  must  necessarily  be  in  error. 

On  the  other  hand,  theology  has  been  too  prone  to  reject 
without  examination  the  investigations  and  conclusions  of 
science.  Assuming  that  a  rather  literal  interpretation  of 
O^iesis  in  human  terms  of  time  and  sense  must  necessarily 
be  final,  she  has  too  often  closed  her  eyes  to  the  light  that 
nature,  properly  understood,  may  shed  upon  the  account  in 
Genesis.  Finding  that  the  testimony  of  science  has  not 
agreed  with  her  preconceived  interpretation  of  Scripture, 
she  has  been  rather  too  ready  to  reject  all  scientlflc  in- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  TJie  Creative  Days  396 

vestigation,  as  well  aa  all  philosophic  inquiry,  as  atheistic 
and  false.  Id  this  adherence  to  Scripture  she  would 
indeed  only  have  been  consistent,  bad  it  not  been  for  the 
fact  that  she  has  confounded  GKid's  Word  with  her  own 
interpretation  of  it.  8he  should  at  least  have  been  op&v  to 
more  light  for  her  interpretation ;  for,  upon  her  own 
premise,  that  both  are  from  OoA,  nature  and  Scripture 
could  not  disagree.  Thus,  where  it  was  a  matter  of  inter- 
pretation alone,  she  should  have  welcomed  at  least  the 
more  settled  results  of  science  that  might  be  harmonized 
with  the  account  in  Genesis. 

Thus  science,  especially  in  her  philosophic  applications, 
has  been  too  bold  in  her  assumptions  and  too  settled  in  her 
conclusions,  many  of  which  have  not  at  all  stood  the  test 
of  later  science.  And  theology  has  been  inclined  to  dis- 
regard or  reject  whatever  light  from  nature  science  might 
throw  upon  the  account  of  Revelation.  But,  as  already 
intimated,  since  the  testimony  of  nature  and  the  account 
in  Genesis  seem  to  be  complementary  for  the  fuller  truth 
involved  in  both,  they  should  be  used  together,  though  each 
in  its  own  way  and  to  its  own  particular  end,  in  the  res- 
olution of  this  great  problem.  Therefore,  science  and 
theology  must  share  each  other's  testimony  and  bear  with 
each  other's  shortcomings.  Nor  must  either  arrogate  all 
truth  to  herself;  but  each  must  humbly  acknowledge  the 
inflnality  of  her  own  immediate  conclusions.  And  where 
the  two  still  seem  to  be  in  conflict,  let  each  patiently  await 
more  light.  Meanwhile  it  is  surely  only  appropriate  for 
science  not  to  assail  the  creative  record  itself,  even  as  it 
is  for  theology  not  to  assail  nature  itsdf. 

IV.   PDBPOSB  AND  SCOPE  OF  RIVBLATION 

The  theologian  must  ever  bear  in  mind  that  the  chief 
purpose  of  Scripture  is  the  revelation  of  the  way  of 
salvation,  and  that  other  things,  even  including  human 
history,  like  a  complex  scaffolding,  are  used  in  so  far  as 
they  contribute  to  that  great  end.  Therefore  it  is  that  the 
beginning  of   Genesis    gives    only    in   barest  outline  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


396  Bibliotbeca  Sacra  [Oct 

account  of  Gfod'B  work  in  creation,  as  the  necessary  nlti- 
mate  premise  to  all  that  follows.  Details  of  the  work  of 
creation  and  ilescriptlonB  of  methods  of  operation,  not 
entering  into  so  general  a  plan,  are  therefore  omitted  from 
its  record.  It  is  given  to  ns  for  its  religionB  value,  not  for 
scientific  enlightenment,  though  surely,  if  of  divine  origin, 
in  no  element  can  it  in  the  least  be  contrary  to  a  science 
true  to  the  facts  of  nature. 

Scripture  here  deals  with  simple  facts  as  effectt,  whose 
ultimate  causes  necessarily  lie  above  human  experience  and 
beyond  first-hand  investigation;  and  it  therefore  does  not 
pretend  to  assign  any  causes  except  the  one  great  First 
Cause  of  all.  Its  pnrpose  being  religious,  not  scientific, 
secondary  causes  are  not  given  because  manifestly  not  a 
part  of  that  purpose.  But  that  is  not  saying  that  therefore 
no  secondary  causes  were  operative,  for  surely  all  sec- 
ondary causes  are  themselves  effects  from  the  great  First 
Cause.'  Therefore  all  secondary  causes  are  of  necessity 
included  in  the  great  First  Cause  and  are  apparently 
implied  in  that  sublime  account  of  the  creation  of  the  uni- 
verse. And,  indeed,  what  seems  to  be  a  finished  universe 
is  still  teeming  with  secondary  causes,  which  is  simply  say- 
ing that  the  First  Cause  continues  to  sustain,  and  perhaps 
is  still  further  developing,  the  created  universe  through 
the  agency  of  secondary  causes  as  the  continued  expres- 
sion of  His  omniflc  will. 

This  truth,  that  the  great  First  Cause  worked  both 
directly  and  through  secondary  causes  in  the  work  of  cre- 
ation, which  should  seem  almost  axiomatic,  has  been  too 
much  overlooked.  The  theologian  in  his  interpretation  of 
Genesis  apparently  could  see  only  the  First  Cause  operative 
in  creation,  while  the  scientist,  in  his  interpretation  of 
nature,  could  apparently  see  only  secondary  causes  oper- 
ative in  a  supposed  merely  cosmic  development.  And  in  so 
doing  their  views  have  seemed  mutually  exclusive.  But 
the  scientist  seems  to  have  forgotten  that  all  secondary 
causes  necessarily  imply  a  first  cause,  of  which  these  them- 

'S«e  tlie  wrIUr'B  Creation  Ex  NibDo  <Bftdger,  1918),  diap.  It. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creatnie  Day»  9VJ 

selves  are  only  effects.  And  the  theologian  might  have 
known  that  the  Firet  Cause  naturally  implies  and  includes 
secondary  causes  as  in  part  the  agencies  of  His  operations. 

V.    SCIENCE   AND   THBOLOOT   AFPBOACBING   TROTH 
FROU  OPPOSITE  DIBBCTIONS 

In  her  treatment  of  this  subject,  theology  properly  etarts 
from  a  special  supernatural  revelation  of  transcendental 
truths  and  facts,  as  premises,  and  therefore  necessarily  rea- 
sons deductively  toward  detailed  natural  phenomena  and 
truths.  Science,  with  equal  propriety,  starts  from  observed 
natural  phenomena,  and  therefore  reasons  inductively 
toward  ultimate  facta  and  truths.  Theology  has  been  in- 
clined to  err  in  the  arbitrary  use  or  application  of  her  re- 
vealed, but  not  fully  understood,  premises.  Science  has 
chiefly  erred  in  forming  rather  hasty  generalisations,  and 
drawing  conclusions,  from  an  insufScient,  and  oftentimes 
imperfectly  understood,  number  of  phenomena  as  her  data 
for  reasoning.  There  is  thus  a  sense  in  which  the  approach 
to  this  sublime  problem  on  the  part  of  theology  and  that  on 
the  part  of  science,  have  virtually  been  from  opposite 
sides.  The  theologian  has  approached  it  from  the  Oodward, 
or  supernatural,  side,  the  side  of  the  ultimate  Cause  or 
Worker;  the  scientist  has  approached  it  from  the  manward, 
or  natural,  side,  or  the  side  of  the  cosmic  effect  or  of  the 
finished  work.  Hence  it  is,  as  already  noted,  that  the  one 
has  seen  only  God,  the  First  Cause,  directly  active;  the 
other  has  seen  operative  only  secondary  causes  with 
which  it  still  teems.  And,  in  a  sense,  both  have  .been  right; 
for  to  the  one,  for  his  purpose,  God  the  Creator  or  Worker 
is  everything,  while  to  the  other,  for  his  special  purpose, 
the  creation  or  work,  with  its  still  inhering  causes  or 
forces,  is  everything.  And  we  believe  that,  like  two  crews 
of  tunnel  workers  working  on  opposite  sides  of  a  great 
mountain,  they  are  really  necessarily  approaching  each 
other  and  must  eventually  meet.  And  that  place  of  meet- 
ing mnst  be  the  very  center  and  heart  of  the  great  over- 
towering  mountain  of  God's  universal  truth. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


898  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

TI.   THB    ACCOUNT    IN    OBNBSIB    MBAXT    FOB   ALL   AQKS 

Remembering  tbe  real  purpose  of  Scripture,  and  partica- 
larly  of  this  account  of  creation  as  its  introduction  and  as 
tte  basic  premise  or  postulate  to  all  tbat  follows,  let  us 
not  lose  sight  of  that  other  equally  important  and  associa- 
ted fact,  tbat  it  la  meant  to  be  suited  to  all  ages.  It  is  to 
be  Ood's  revelation  concerning  the  origin  of  all  things  to 
tbe  last  generation,  however  cultured  and  enlightened,  just 
as  much  as  it  was  to  the  earliest  people  to  whom  it  was 
first  given,  however  primitive  and  untutored.  And  to  both 
it  was  meant  to  be  equally  adapted  aa  in  outline  the  ulti- 
mate truth.  Therefore,  its  presentation  of  truth,  even  its  very 
language,  must  of  necessity  be  of  that  general  character 
that  fits  it  to  all  ages  and  to  every  condition  of  man.  If 
it  had  been  presented  in  the  scientific  terminology  of  this 
twentieth  century,  and  with  scientific  details  intelligible 
to  this  generation,  it  would  have  been  absolutely  Incompre- 
hensible by  the  generation  of  the  fifteenth  century  before 
Christ,  and  largely  so  even  by  every  generation  before  the 
nineteenth  century  of  our  era.  Again,  if  it  were  given  in 
the  scientific  terminology,  in  the  light  of  all  the  discoveries, 
of  future  centuries  of  human  history,  it  might  be  unintelli- 
gible even  to  this  twentieth  century  with  all  its  boasted 
scientific  attainment.  Therefore,  tbe  use  of  the  technical 
phraseology  of  any  one  century  of  enlightenment  would 
hardly  have  fitted  it  for  any  other. 

The  revelation  of  creation  is  thus  given  in  that  universal 
phenomenal  language  that  makes  it  intelligible  to  all  ages, 
and  to  all  stages  of  enlightenment.  Therefore,  no  one 
age  can  ever  expect  to  exhaust  its  full  meaning,  as  no  one 
age  has  complete  possession  of  all  the  arcana  of  nature. 
And  yet,  every  age,  however  enlightened,  can  reverently 
approach  this  divine  record,  matchless  in  its  outline  sim- 
plicity, and  not  find  its  own  real  discoveries  out  of  har- 
mony with  it.  There  it  stands  unique,  yet  universal  for  all 
time,  divinely  matching  all  real  discoveries  of  truth,  as  we 
believe  could  be  shown,  like  the  simple  outline  of  prophecy 
matching  its  fulfillment  in  a  most  complex  history.     Nor 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creative  Days  399 

can  the  last  word  of  real  science  ever  contradict  it,  if  of 
divine  origin,  or  any  real  htiman  needs  outgrow  it. 

VII.   THE   IA2lQVA.Qt    PHDMOHaNAL 

Perhaps  a  few  words  In  further  explanation  of  the  lan- 
guage UBed  might  not  be  out  of  place.  We  still  speak  of 
the  sun  as  rising  or  as  setting,  though  we  know  it  to  be  so 
only  in  appearance  and  that  what  really  happens  is  tbe 
earth  rotating  on  its  axis  from  west  to  east  as  the  cause  of 
this  appearance.  We  may  say,  the  eye  sees,  the  mind 
forms  a  resultant  image,  and  language  endeavors  to  express 
in  words  what  it  has  imaged.  But  the  words  are  not  the 
image,  much  lees  tbe  thing  imaged.  They  are  at  best  but 
a  representation — and  that,  in  its  last  analysis,  a  pictorial 
one  —  growing  out  of  the  phenomenon,  or  appearance  to  tbe 
eye,  as  imaged  in  tbe  mind.  This  is  tbe  natural  birth  of 
language;  and  the  more  primitive  the  people  are,  tbe  more 
phenomenal  is  their  language.  And  though  with  the  devel- 
opment of  language  this  phenomenal  nature  of  it  is  in 
many  terms  alt  but  lost,  it  stiU  lies  imbedded — as  it  were, 
fossilized — in  the  apparently  meaningless  combination  of 
sounds  or  letters. 

Thus  all  language  in  its  last  analysis  is  really  phenom- 
enal or  metaphorical.  And  so  moral  and  spiritual  truth  is, 
of  course,  necessarily  revealed  to  us  in  phenomenal  or  met- 
aphorical language,  the  basis  of  whose  metaphors  is  even 
itself  phenomenal, — phenomenal  physical  nature.  Thus  we 
speak  of  sweet  music,  glorious  truth,  etc.  Hence,  neces- 
sarily, the  many  anthropomorphisms  and  anthropopathisms 
in  Scripture.  Tbe  things  which,  or  whose  phenomena,  lie 
within  tbe  range  of  our  physical  senses  are  made  the 
images  to  show  forth  the  things  that  lie  without,  or  the 
supersensuons ;  and  the  language  of  their  phenomena  be- 
comes the  vehicle  to  convey  conceptions,  however  faintly, 
of  transcendental  ideas.  The  known  becomes  the  imaging 
mirror  for  the  unknown.  And  if  the  known  itself  is  dim 
and  shadowy,  as  it  really  is,  even  at  best,  bow  much  more 
so  must  be  the  unknown,  its  mirrored  image!    Indeed,  as 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


400  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

the  embodied  soul  caunot  directly  or  immediately  view  or 
look  out  upon  the  environing  univeree,  but  only  indirectly 
or  mediately  through  the  several  windows  of  the  bodily 
sense-organs,  aU  its  knowledge  of  external  nature  must, 
strictly  speaking,  necessarily  be  imperfect  and  incomplete. 
As  its  contact  with  and  operation  upon  physical  nature  ia 
thus  only  through  these  appointed  tools  or  means  of  knowl- 
edge, it  can  truly  or  literally  only  "  know  in  part  "  even  the 
things  of  this  present  physical  world,  not  to  speak  of  the 
origin  of  the  cosmos  and  its  past  and  future  or  of  the 
spiritual  world  that  transcends  it  and  the  ultimate  reality 
in  that  infinite  Being  that  is  the  Oround  or  Author  of 
both.  The  ^o  in  the  present  state  can  thus  at  best  see 
or  know  the  non-ego  only  "  in  a  mirror  darkly."  Only  in 
our  glorified  humanity  hereafter  can  we,  by  immediate 
vision,  see  "  face  to  face "  and  "  know  fully."  In  its  last 
analysis,  it  is  this  fact  that  lies  at  the  basis  of  the  perplex- 
ing problem  of  the  "  reality "  of  all  philosophic  search. 
Hence  even  an  absolutely  intelligible  direct  revelation  of 
such  transcendent  facts  would  seem  equally  impossible  to 
an  embodied  spirit. 

Surely,  if  God  necessarily  reveals  himself  elsewhere  in 
Scripture  in  various  anthropomorphisms  and  anthropo- 
pathisms,  in  human  language  based  by  metaphor  upon  the 
things  of  time  and  sense,  we  may  reverently  believe  that  in 
His  revelation  of  creation,  He  also  similarly  uses  hnman 
terms,  with  all  their  implied  metaphors,  based  upon  the 
phenomena  of  sense  and  time.  And  as  in  the  many 
acknowledged  anthropopatbisms  and  anthropomorphisms 
of  Qod's  Word  we  would  not  ascribe  to  Him  human 
emotions,  form,  and  action,  so  in  His  account  of  creation 
we  must  not  limit  Him  to  human  methods  and  conditions 
of  earthly  times  and  relations. 

II.    Thk  Uaih  Facts  Set  Forth 
Enough   has  probably  now  been   said  on   the  sources 
thonselves,  for  the  better  understanding  of  their  contents. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creative  Days  401 

We  shall  therefore  proceed  to  an  examioatioii  of  the  main 
facts  set  forth  or  implied. 

I.    THE  BBGINNINOj  AND  THI  CBBATtON  OF  THE  BLBMBNTB 

The  accooDt  in  Genesia  opens  with  the  very  striking 
sentence,  "  In  the  beginning  God  created  the  heavens  and 
the  earth."  What  the  true  and  full  import  of  this  sentence 
is,  and  what  its  relation  to  what  follows,  it  is  difficult 
with  absolute  certainty  to  determine.  There  are  several 
views  as  to  that  import  and  relation. 

1.  This  opening  sentence  may  be  meant  to  serve  merely 
as  an  introduction  to  the  account  itself,  and  would  thus  be 
a  brief,  comprehensive  statement  of  the  whole  work  of 
creation,  which  is  immediately  after  given  somewhat  in 
detail.  According  to  this  view,  it  would  practically  be 
equivalent  to  a  caption  or  general  heading  for  the  whole 
account,  and  would  at  once  arrest  the  attention  of  the 
reader  to  a  theme  ineffably  grand.  This  is  rather  the 
popular,  and  no  doubt  the  prevalent,  view;  and  upon  first 
thought  it  seems  very  plausible.  But  this  would  still 
leave  open  the  question  as  to  the  origination  of  the  ele- 
ments, whether  viewed  as  so-called  ponderable  matter  or  as 
ultimately  nothing  but  energy,  for  the  account  Immediately 
proceeds,  "  And  the  earth  was  waste  and  void,"  etc.  The 
matter  or  material,  or  the  elemental  energy,  of  unorganized 
chaos  is  thus  referred  to  as  already  existing  before  this  sec- 
ond verse.  And  if  the  first  verse  were  only  the  general 
introduction  or  the  comprehensive  caption  to  the  whole, 
then  we  should  have  here  no  revelation  as  to  the  whence  of 
so-called  matter.  Whether  it  had  at  some  previous  time 
been  created  by  Ood,  not  revealed  here  but  assumed,  or 
whether  it  had  existed  from  eternity  and  was  therefore 
co-eternal  with  God,  would  then  surely  be  an  open  ques- 
tion, left  with  the  reader — perhaps  to  try  his  reason,  and 
perchance  bis  faith. 

Wh&t  a  plausible  argument  this  would  afford  to  the  ex- 
ponent of  the  theory  of  the  eternity  of  matter  or  the  ele- 
ments, however  viewed, — a   theory   very  natural    to   the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


402  BibUotkeoa  Sacra  [Oct 

materialist,  or  the  mechanistic  ecientist,  with  his  laws  of 
the  uniformity  of  nature  and  of  the  apparent  conservation 
of  energy  and  matter  or  of  the  all-incloBiye  monistic  sub- 
stance! For,  recognizing  only  secondary  caases,  these  laws 
to  him  seem  absolute,  not  only  for  nature  in  its  cosmic 
derelopment  but  also  for  that  dim  and  mysterious  period 
before  the  present  supposedly  developed  cosmos.  This 
would  make  of  God — if  indeed  He  were  still  regarded  as 
necessary  to  an  intelligible  explanation  of  things — not  a 
real  creator,  that  is,  a  creator  c»  nihilo,  but  a  great 
master-builder  or  fashioner  of  the  universe,  in  the  six  crea- 
tive days,  from  preexisting  elements  at  His  hand.  But  the 
theory  of  the  eternity  of  the  world-stuff  is  untenable,  not 
only  in  the  light  of  Scripture  with  its  one  infinite  and 
absolute  Existence,  Ood,  but  also  in  the  light  of  its  own 
nature  and  of  its  very  necessary  finiteness.^ 

Therefore,  even  upon  the  basis  of  this  view  of  the  import 
of  the  opening  sentence  in  Genesis — according  to  which 
there  would  apparently  be  no  revelation  of  the  creation  of 
the  elements — we  should  eventually  be  forced  back  upon 
the  only  tenable  conclusion,  tbat  the  so-called  world-stuff 
itself  had  at  some  previous  time  been  created  by  tbat  Being 
whom  we  call  Ood,  as  the  mind's  great  necessary  funda- 
mental postulate.  According  to  this  view  the  term  be- 
ginning could,  therefore,  not  refer  to  any  absolute  begin- 
ning, such  as  the  beginning  of  created  being  itself,  or  of  the 
elements,  or  even  of  time,  but  to  the  beginning  of  the 
present  cosmos,  whose  fashioning  or  construction  would 
thus  therein  be  set  forth. 

2.  That  opening  sentence  may  also  be  taken  to  mean 
the  very  thing  which  would  otherwise  be  left  an  open 
question  by  the  interpretation  that  it  is  merely  an  intro- 
duction or  caption  to  what  follows :  it  may  mean  the  crea- 
tion of  the  world-elements  themselves,  and  of  course, 
ex  nihilo.  According  to  this  view,  the  term  beginning 
would  clearly  refer  to  the  time  of  that  primal  creation,  and 
would  evidently  mean  the  absolute  beginning  of  the  ex- 
>  Creation  Ex  Nihilo,  chaps,  v.-vli 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creative  Dayg  4(^ 

istence  of  the  material  of  chaos.  And  as  time  is  ai^mrent- 
ly  measareil  duration,  based  apoD  eoccefislve  physical 
changes  or  revolutiouB  in  multiplications  and  divisionB 
with  their  coincident  events,  probably  that  beginning  also 
marked  ibe  lieginning  of  time,  as  we  know  it.  Bat  whether 
it  is  so  inclusive  as  to  mean  the  beginning  of  all  created 
being,  it  would  be  impossible  to  determine ;  for  the  creation 
of  angelic  beings  may  have  antedated  the  creation  of  onr 
physical  cosmos  aitd  may  prafaaps  have  antedated  even  the 
creation  of  its  tmbatance,  or  its  ctmstitutire  elements. 

Moreover,  may  there  not  have  been  other  creations,  and 
even  of  other  sentient  beings  in  them,  of  which  we  have  no 
revelation  and  of  which  a  revelation  would  clearly  be 
unnecessary  for,  and  perhaps  unintelligible  to,  this  earth's 
race  of  men?  There  may  even  note  exist  other  universes, 
and  perhaps  with  rational  beings,  apart  and  independent 
from  and  beyond  our  own,— created  perchance  before  and 
perchance  after  our  own,  but  of  which  we  have,  and  perhaps 
could  have,  no  knowledge.  Other  universes  might  even 
have  been  created,  run  their  appointed  courses,  and  then 
been  disint^rated  or  even  annihilated,  before  ours  was 
called  into  cosmic  or  even  into  elemental  being.  And  our 
own  might  even  have  been  fashioned  or  furnished  from  the 
disintegrated  elements  of  an  older  universe.  Who  can  say 
with  certainty  that  this  could  not  be  possible,  for  who  can 
limit  the  operations  or  the  power  of  the  omnipotent  and 
eternal  God  to  our  own  universe  with  its  limited  cycle  of 
duration?  And  yet,  in  any  of  the  above  possibilities,  that 
first  sentence  in  Qenesis  would  not  be  any  the  less  true; 
for  that  beginning  would  simply  be  shifted  back  to  the 
time  when  the  substance  of  present  nature's  primal  universe 
was  bom  out  of  the  womb  of  vacuous  nothing.  Bat  it 
would  be  shifted  back  to  that  only;  for  the  creation 
of  other  possible,  elementally  distinct,  universes,  created 
earlier  in  their  elements,  as  well  as  of  perhaps  later  ones, 
would  not  be  included  in  this  creative  account,  and  the 
word  beginning  at  its  head  would  be  altogether  unaffected 
by  such  universe  or  universes,  as  its  contents  are  meant  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


4M  Bibliotheoa  Sacra  [Oct. 

be  a  Tevelation  of  the  creation  of  our  oniTerw,  aod  to  man 
as  a  being  related  to  and  confined  vitbin  it,  at  least  so  long 
as  he  needs  such  revelation.  Sncb  beginning  would  th«i 
apparently  not  be  identical  with  that  spoken  of  in  the  first 
verse  of  8t.  John's  Gospel,  as  before  oil  creation. 

Taking,  tlien,  that  first  verse  in  Qenesis  as  the  crystal- 
lized account  of  the  creation,  by  God's  omnific  power,  of 
the  elements,  whether  viewed  as  matter  or  as  nothing  bat 
energy,  out  of  which  the  creative  Word  later  fashioned  onr 
cosmos,  we  might  conceive  of  indefinite  time  elapsing  be- 
tween what  is  described  in  it  and  in  what  follows.  During 
this  period,  perhaps  within  that  chaos  other  forces  operated. 
And  percfaauce  the  forces  still  active  might  then  have 
been  impressed  upon  it  to  be  used  during  the  later  cosmia 
period  as  His  secondary  agencies  in  the  unfolding  process 
of  the  following  six  creative  days.  Of  course,  the  time  of 
the  act  bodied  forth  by  the  contents  of  that  first  verse 
might  also  be  taken  as  having  immediately  preceded,  as 
that  act  was  the  preparation  for,  the  creative  steps  that 
followed.  And  surely  no  one  can  absolutely  deny  the  pos- 
sibility of  either  assumption  as  to  the  time-relation  of  the 
primal  creation  of  the  first  verse  and  the  eitefold  cosmic 
creation  of  the  verses  immediately  following.  Surely,  time 
measured  by  cycles  and  events  does  not  enter  as  a 
necessary  factor  into  the  operations  of  the  eternal  God. 

II.    THE  COSMIC  CEBATI0N3  AND  THBIR  TIME-PERIODS 

It  has  been  observed  by  various  writers  that  the  record 
of  creation  in  Genesis  is  a  truly  unique  record.  Even  as  a 
contribution  to  literature  it  is  a  consummate  masterpiece. 
And  it  sets  forth  a  series  of  creative  acts  that  were  unmis- 
takably according  to  a  wonderful  plan  and  a  series  of 
so-called  days  that  must  have  been  of  an  extraordinary 
character,  —  facts  which  we  shall  now  proceed  briefly  to 
consider. 

1.    The  Successive  Creative  Acts  of  the  Cosmic  Week. 

The  accounts  of  the  first  three  days  tell  respectively  of 
the  creation  or  manifestation  of  light,  of  the  establishing 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creative  Daya  405 

of  the  flrmaDent  together  with  the  dividing  of  the  waters 
below  it  from  those  above  it,  and  of  the  separation  of  the 
waters  npon  the  earth's  surface  from  the  land  and  also  of 
the  creation  of  plant  life.  There  were  thus  two  distinct 
creative  acta  on  the  third  creative  day.  The  accoants  of 
the  last  three  days  tell  respectively  of  the  placing  of  lights 
or  luminaries  in  the  heavens  with  their  appointments,  of 
the  calling  into  being  of  sea-animals  together  with  winged 
creatures,  and  of  the  calling  into  being  of  land-animals 
and  also  of  the  creation  of  man  as  nature's  crown  and  lord. 
Hence  there  were  also  two  distinct  creative  acta  on  the 
sixth  creative  day. 

The  first  triad  thus  began  with  light  and  ended  with  two 
creative  acts,  the  second  one  being  the  creation  of  life  in 
its  lowest  form,  in  plants.  The  second  triad  began  with 
organised  light-dispensers  and  ended  vrith  two  creative 
acts,  the  second  one  being  that  of  the  creation  of  the  high- 
est, psychic,  life  in  man,  Ood's  image.  Hence  both  periods 
began  with  light,  the  first  with  light  diffused  and  the  sec- 
ond with  light  radiated  from  highly  organized  luminaries; 
both  periods  ended  with  life,  the  first  with  the  lowest  living 
oi^;anisms  (plants)  and  the  second  with  the  highest 
organized  life  (man).  And  at  least  the  latter  of  these 
creations,  that  of  man  as  a  living  soul  (i.  27;  ii.  7),  was  a 
superadded  act  and  manifestly  a  distinct  and  real  creation 
ex  niftilo,  or  an  absolute  creation,  as  the  beginning  of  a  new 
non-absolute  entity, — as  was  also  evidently  that  of  living 
beings  in  sea  and  air.  Hence  the  use  of  the  word  hara  for 
these  two  creations  {ver.  21,  27),  even  as  for  the  absolute 
creation  of  primal  matter  (ver.  1).  The  account  of  the 
first  triad,  moreover,  may  be  said  to  speak  of  Gtod's  work 
upon  crude  matter  as  the  preparation  for  the  beginnings 
of  life,  with  which  that  triad  was  crowned  and  closed ;  the 
account  of  the  second  triad  speaks  of  Ood's  work  upon 
matter  in  its  higher  organization  and  of  the  calling  into 
being  of  the  successive  higher  forms  of  life,  crowning  all 
with  the  life  of  the  human  soul. 

Forthermore,  creation  manifestly  proceeded  by  regular 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


406  BibUotheca  8acra  [Oct. 

BtepB  from  low  to  high  and  from  bi^  to  higher,  each  step 
occupying  a  definite,  or  from  another  viewpoint  an  indef- 
inite, time-period  called  day  (j/otn).  The  great  acts  of 
God's  creative  work  are  thus  revealed  as  taking  place  in 
chronological  sequence;  and  that  revelaticm  is  expressed 
in  terms  that  make  the  record  true  and  relatively  intel- 
ligible to  every  age.  And  yet,  even  the  sacred  chronicler 
probably  did  not  understand  the  full  content  of  the  con- 
ceptions bodied  forth  in  the  terms  he  was  moved  to  employ 
in  this  account, — which  might,  in  a  sense,  well  be  spoken 
of  as  an  inverse  prophecy, — jjiBt  as  the  prophets  that  spoke 
of  the  coming  Messiah,  or  of  any  other  future  event,  conld 
not  fully  know  the  future  historic  content  of  their  proi^e- 
des.  Nor  can  we  even  yet  fully  understand  this  meaning. 
Nay,  as  prophecy  must  first  be  clearly  fulfilled  by  history 
before  its  fuller  meaning  becomes  apparent,  so  we  may  be- 
lieve that  not  till  the  universe  will  have  had  its  full  out- 
working, and  till  man  will  have  clearly  read  all  its  secret 
meanings  and  traced  its  every  law  and  known  its  every 
state  throughout  all  ages  of  its  existence,  will  he  be  able 
fully  to  understand  the  phenomenal  panoramic  outlines  of 
those  creative  records,  and  that  is  never!  One  thing  is 
clear,  however,  that  we  have  here  a  unique  account  of  the 
successive  acts  or  works  of  God  that  marked  the  successive 
days  or  time-periods.  And  that  is  the  important  thing, 
next  to  its  revelation  of  a  Creator,  Ood. 

The  creative  acts  are,  moreover,  described  as  the  work  of 
a  God  who  is  a  free  living  peraotuility,  and  not  simply  a 
blind  and  fateful  all-pervading  energy.  The  narrative 
speaks  of  this  creation  as  His  own  free  act,  uninfluenced  by 
anything  external  to,  or  even  by  any  necessity  inherent  in. 
Himself.  It  also  makes  it  clear  that  the  creature  is 
essentially  different  and  distinct  from  its  Creator.  Each 
separate  event  chronicled  is  represented  as  having  had  its 
8api>mataral  origin  external  to  the  Creator,  from  His 
ouinific  fiat.  And  we  might  almost  see  it  implied  in  the 
very  language  that,  after  each  divine  fiat  to  inaugurate  a 
particular  work  or  a  specific  creation,  the  Creator  operated 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creative  Days  407 

in  further  developing  it  tlirough  secondary  causes,  them- 
selves the  effects  or  imposed  forces  of  these  saccessire 
divine  fiats.  This  appears  from  the  expressions,  "  Let  the 
earth  brisg  forth,"  "  created  and  made  "  (ii.  3  —  created  to 
make),  etc.  Thus  no  event  was  self-originated;  and  where 
secondary  inhering  forces  became  operative  by  divine  ap- 
pointment to  complete  or  carry  forward  the  work,  these 
were  themselves  also  God's  creatures.  Thas,  apart  from 
acts  of  created  will,  totally  and  absolutely  all  universal 
nature  is  alone  God's  created  work. 

Some  geologists  speak  of  vast  cataclysms,  or  sudden 
extraordinary  leaps,  in  nature  during  the  seonic  history  of 
our  earth,  in  some  of  which  they  acknowledge  an  energy, 
or  set  of  forces,  operating  that  was  extraordinory  and 
above  all  explanation.  With  a  little  more  faith,  or  scien- 
tific imagination,  they  might  see  in  those  very  cataclysms 
the  work  of  special  divine  fiats,  some  actually  matching 
those  spoken  of  in  onr  creative  records.  In  acknowledging 
the  presence  of  the  extraordinary  with  the  ordinary  in  the 
past  history  of  our  globe,  they  would  have  only  one  step 
to  acknowledge  the  supernatural  divine  presence  in  direct 
operation  with  the  operation  of  secondary  causes.  And,  as 
already  noted,  imdoubtedly  those  special  divine  fiats,  or 
immediate  and  supernatural  creative  acts,  in  the  first  chap- 
ter of  Genesis,  started  each  its  distinctive  work,  which  was 
then  to  be  carried  forward,  mediately  and  naturally, 
through  the  secondary  laws  or  forces  implanted  in  nature 
by  those  same  successive  flats.  The  geologist's  unex- 
plained cataclysms,  followed  by  nature's  ordinary  pro- 
cesses, would  thus  become  full  of  meaning. 

We  have,  then,  in  the  first  chapter  of  Genesis  a  super- 
naturally  revealed  account  of  a  series  of  successive 
supernatural  events,  enacted  by  that  transcendent  Being, 
God,  in  six  successive  time-periods  called  days. 

2.    The  Length  of  the  Yom,  the  Creative  Day. 
As  to  the  length  of  those  days  or  time-periods,  it  might 
be  asked,  Who  can  limit  them  to  a  duration  of  twenty-four 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  30*.    2 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


408  BtbUotheoa  8acfa  [Oct. 

honn  each  when  the  Inspired  narratire  clearly  does  not 
thus  limit  them?  Indeed,  bat  few  thinkers  of  tliia  gen^a- 
tion  would  regard  thetn  as  ordinary  days.  As  the  account 
is  one  of  extraordinary,  or  sapematnral,  acts  on  the  part 
of  an  infinite  and  absolute  God,  and  as  everything  else 
connected  with  it  ia  apparaitly  supematnral,  so  should  we 
reverently  consider  the  days  spoken  of  to  be  more  thorn 
ordinary  daya.  Indeed,  the  very  indefiniteness  and  singa- 
larity  of  the  language  employed  is  suf^iestive  of  this  fact, 
even  as  the  greatness  or  extraordinary  character  of  the 
work  suggests  extraordinary  days.  And  as  some  cme  sug- 
gested long  ago,  while  the  sacred  writers  glorify  Ch>d  for 
His  woit  of  creation,  nowhere  do  they  speak  of  the  cre- 
ative days  as  miraculous  days  of  twenty-four  hours  for  so 
great  a  work  of  creation.  Horeorer,  the  term  day  is  used 
in  different  senses  in  the  Scriptures.  We  read  of  the  day 
of  visitation  (Isa.  x.  3),  of  the  day  of  the  Lord  (Zech. 
xir.  1),  of  the  day  of  salvation  (2  Cor.  vi.  2),  and  the  like. 
So  Christ  said,  "  Abraham  rejoiced  to  see  my  day  "  (John 
viii.  56).  We  need  hardly  say  that  these  terms  clearly  do 
not  i-efer  to  twenty-four-hour  periods  of  time.  And  in  the 
first  two  passages  the  word  for  day  is,  of  course,  the 
Hebrew  yom,  as  in  the  account  of  creation  in  Qenesis. 
Furthermore,  in  the  creative  record  itself  the  term  day 
{yom)  is  used  in  different  senses,  as  is  acknowledged,  aa 
follows:  day  of  about  twelve  hours  as  distinguished  from 
night  (ver.  14,  16,  18),  solar  day  of  twenty-four  hours 
(ver.  14,  "and  let  thran  be  ...  for  days"),  day  as  dis- 
tinguished from  daAness  after  the  creation  of  light  on  the 
first  creative  day  (ver.  B,  "And  God  called  the  light  Day  ") , 
the  creative  days  themselves  (ver.  5,  8,  13,  19,  23,  31), 
and  day  for  the  whole  six-day  creative  period  (ii.  4,  "  in 
the  day  that  Jehovah  Ood  made  earih  and  heaven").  It 
surety  must  be  clear  to  every  reader  that  in  only  one  of 
these  cases  does  the  word  yom  signify  a  twenty-four-hour 
day;  namely,  the  second  one  (second  use  of  it  in  ver.  14). 
And,  of  course,  probably  this  eariih  alone  of  all  possible 
worlds  has  a  twenty-four-hour  day,  whUe  upon  no  two 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creative  Dipya  4M 

planets  of  our  solar  Bjatou  are  the  A«y*  alike,  and  per- 
haps upon  no  two  other  heavenly  bodte«  that  may  circle 
around  their  aana  In  the  atany  nnlrerse. 

These  six  creative  time-periods  are  therefore  designated 
days  becaoBe  they  were  sQcceasive  periods  analogous  in 
varloos  ways  to  the  period  familiar  as  day  to  man,  for 
whom  this  account  was  meant  to  be  a  revelation.  Elach 
was  a  period,  however  IcHig,  marking  its  own  distinct  and 
completed  woi^;  and  hence  for  these  reasons,  and  not 
because  of  length  or  duration,  it  is  in  human  language 
called  day.  Moreover,  it  is  altogether  probable  that  those 
six  creative  days  were  not  of  equal  length  or  duration. 

But  the  objector  will  say  that  surely  an  almighty  Ood 
could  have  created  the  whole  universe  even  in  a  moment 
of  time.  And  his  objection  might  be  considered  as  having 
some  validity,  provided  he  could  claim  to  know  the  whole 
why  and  hov>  of  Ood's  creation.  But  it  is  sorely  not  a 
question  as  to  whether  Ood  could  do  so  or  not,  but  one  as 
to  whether  He  did  so  or  not.  And  here  the  evidence,  both 
from  His  inspired  record  and  from  His  finished  work,  is 
overwhelmingly  against  such  an  instantaneous  creation. 
It  might  be  said  that  an  age  and  an  instant  must  be  equal 
with  Him  who  inhabiteth  eternity  and  who  is  not  limited 
by  time  and  space  relations.  Thns  what  would  seem  an 
age  when  measured  by  material  revolutions  might  be 
equivalent  to  a  moment  to  an  unmeasured  or  infinite 
Being.  To  Him  to  whom  a  thousand  years  are  but  as  a 
day,  our  measured  time  is  of  little  significance.  But,  of 
course,  it  must  also  be  remembered  that  to  Him  a  day  is  as 
a  thousand  years.  In  other  words,  to  the  eternal  and 
infinite  Ood  there  is  no  measured  time  as  we  know  it,  for 
He  must  necessarily  be  timeless  in  duration,  even  as  He 
is  measureless  in  essence.  However,  it  is  not  a  question  as 
to  the  length  or  duration  of  those  creative  days  to  the 
eternal  and  unchangeable  Creator  Ood,  but  it  is  one  as  to 
the  length  or  duration  of  them  to  His  t^nporal  and  change- 
able creature  man. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


410  BibUotkeca  Sacra  [Oct 

But  the  most  common  argument  in  aapposed  proof  of  the 
theory  that  the  creative  days  were  twenty-fonr-botir  days 
of  oar  earth,  has  t>eeii  the  one  hased  upon  the  Sabbath.  In 
the  beginning  of  the  second  chapter  of  Genesis  it  is  said 
that  the  Lord  rested  on  the  seventh  day  and  that  He 
blessed  that  day  and  liallowed  it  And  again  in  the  com- 
roaodment  of  the  Sabbath  for  man,  he  is  commanded  not 
to  do  any  worlc  on  the  Sabbath  Day;  and  the  reastm 
assigned  is,  that  in  six  days  the  Lord  made  heaven  and 
earth  and  rested  on  the  seventh  day. 

Now  it  is  of  coarse  true  that  the  Babbath  which  man  is 
conmianded  to  keep,  as  well  as  each  of  the  other  six  days 
of  the  terrestrial  week,  is  a  aoUa-  day  of  twenty-fonr  hoars. 
Bat  from  this  the  conclusion  cannot  be  drawn  that  there- 
fore the  days  of  the  creative  week  mast  have  been  days  of 
twenty-fonr  hours  each.  Such  reasoning  woald  iavolve 
the  assumption  that  the  days  of  the  creative  week  were  the 
same  as  are  the  days  of  the  terrestrial  week.  And  as  that 
is  really  the  thing  to  be  proved,  it  would  clearly  be  a 
petitio  principii.  Indeed,  as  the  fourth  creative  day  so 
manifestly  included  ordinary  terrestrial  days,  the  latter 
cannot  be  the  measure  of  the  former.  And  this  mast,  of 
course,  also  be  true  of  the  other  creative  days,  as  belonging 
to  the  same  class.  It  will  also  be  remembered  that  man 
was  created  at  the  close  of  the  sixth  day  and  that  the  Sab- 
bath followed  upon  his  creation.  It  would  seem  strange 
it  six  terrestrial  days  which  man  had  not  known  except 
part  of  the  last,  would  have  been  followed  immediately  by 
the  terrestrial  Sabbath,  so  that  man's  first  full  day  of  life 
would  have  been  his  Sabbath.  It  will  also  be  observed  that 
the  Sabbath  of  the  creative  week  is  not  spoken  of  as  con- 
sisting of  an  evening  and  a  morning.  It  is  called  simply 
the  seventh  day.  Nor  is  Clod  spoken  of  as  resuming  His 
work  for  another  creation.  Then,  what  of  the  succeeding 
weeks  or  ages?  Would  those  have  been  weeks  or  ages  of 
rest,  without  any  resuming  of  work?  And  yet  Jesus  said, 
"My  Father  worketh  hitherto,  and  I  work." 
The  physical  creation  had  been  completed  and  nature's 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creative  Days  411 . 

laws  had  been  ordained.  Man  as  nature's  crown  was  here 
to  contemplate  Ood's  handiwork,  and  intellectually,  as  well 
as  partly  physically,  to  be  creation's  lord.  God's  creatiye 
Sabbath  had  thas  be^n  as  man's  day  of  intellectual  un- 
folding and  sovereignty.  And  to  that  day  ia  assigned  no 
evening,  probably  simply  because  to  it  has  not  come  the 
morning  parallel  to  those  of  the  other  six  days.  The 
creative  days  of  physical  nature  are  past,  and  the  day  of 
God's  rest  from  the  work  of  creation  (but  of  providence  in 
created  nature)  and  of  man  as  the  object  of  God's  special 
concern  and  delight,  is  here.  And  as  on  the  sixth  creative 
day  man  in  the  image  of  God  appeared  as  nature's  lord,  so 
on  the  creative  Sabbath  God  has  appeared  in  the  likeness 
of  man  to  redeem  him  and  to  complete  his  sovereignty. 

Moreover,  it  is  expressly  declared  that  God  finished  His 
work  on  the  seventh  day,  not  on  the  sixth,  however  we  may 
explain  that  statement.  And  be  it  remembered  that  this 
declaration  follows  a  statement  that  is  apparently  meant 
as  a  sort  of  interlude  between  the  account  of  the  sixth 
day  and  that  ol^  the  seventh  day;  namely,  "And  the 
heavens  and  the  earth  were  finished,  and  all  the  host  of 
them."  Thus,  though  the  work  of  cosmic  creation  was 
completed  in  six  days,  it  was  not  till  the  seventh  day  that 
'*  God  finished  His  work  which  He  had  made."  And  then 
He  is  said  to  have  rested,  though  surely  not  as  we  speak  of 
resting,  bat  father  in  cessation  from  physical  creation  and 
in  contemplation  and  delight.  And  yet  He  still  works, 
through  secondary  causes  in  physical  nature,  and  in 
providence.  We  must  remember  that  these  statements 
about  God  are  necessarily  anthropomorphic  and  anthropo- 
pathic  metaphors. 

A  close  examination  of  the  account  of  the  institution  of 
the  Babbath  for  man  should  thus  make  it  clear  that  the 
divine  week  (the  celestial  circle)  is  held  up  as  the  pattern 
of  the  earthly  human  week  (the  terrestrial  circle).  The 
days  or  degrees  are  equal  in  number,  but  necessarily  very 
unequal  in  length.  As  in  six  divine  days  God  created,  so 
in  six  terrestrial  or  human  days  man  is  to  toork.  And  as 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


412  BibUotheca  Scijra  [Oct 

God  rested  from  Hia  work  of  physical  creation  on  tlie  sev- 
enth olamio  day,  or  Ood's  Sabbath,  bo  is  man  to  rest  from 
bis  labors  on  each  seventh  day  (or  on  one  day  oat  of  seven) 
of  the  pkmet  which  is  his  abode.  Bat  as  the  nature  of 
God's  work  and  rest  was  different  from  that  of  man's 
work  and  rest,  even  as  the  natures  of  the  workers  are  dif- 
ferent, BO  were  God's  six  creative  days  and  creative  Sab- 
bath different  from  man's  days  of  labor  and  Sabbath  of 
rest  And  this  mast  also  be  true  of  the  Christian  Lord's 
Day,  of  a  completed  redemption.  And  if  there  are  ratiooal 
creatures  like  man  on  other  heavenly  bodies,  as  their 
days  would  not  be  of  the  same  length  as  ours,  they  may 
observe  one  day  out  of  seven  of  their  own  planet's  rota- 
tions as  their  day  of  rest,  or  Lord's  Day  of  worship.  And 
thus  the  same  commandment  to  observe  one  day  out  of 
seven,  but  of  their  own  kind,  in  commemoration  of  a  com- 
pleted creation  (or  of  a  completed  redanption)  would 
serve  for  all  poeaibte  worlds  of  rational  creatures.  God's 
divine  creative  week,  with  its  Sabbath,  would  equally  be 
the  pattern  for  all  worlds,  however  long  or'  short  their 
days.  And  unless  God's  creative  days  were  different  from 
our  solar  days,  snch  a  record  of  creation  as  that  in  Genesis 
could  be  true  for  our  earth  alone.  It  should  therefore 
need  no  farther  proof  that  Qod's  creative  Sabbath  is 
different  from  man's  Sabbath,  for  which  it  serves  as  the 
pattern.  Hence,  the  creative  days  were  not  ordinary  ter- 
restrial days  of  twenty-four  bonrs,  but  extraordinary  or 
olamic  days. 

As  already  remarked,  the  creative  days  are  spoken  of  as 
consisting  each  of  an  evening  and  a  morning,  the  evening 
having  been  before  the  morning  in  the  order  of  time,  and 
apparently  also  in  the  order  of  event  or  condition  which  it 
is  by  analogy  meant  to  characterize.  But,  surely,  they 
were  very  different  from  those  caused  by  the  sun,  which 
did  not  even  appear  until  the  fourth  creative  day.  Nor 
would  a  solar  day  be  described  as  consisting  of  an  evening 
and  a  morning,  or  of  an  evening  before  a  morning,  althoogh 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Creative  Dags  413 

perhaps  from  thia  as  a  model  or  sagxestion  the  Jewish 
da;  b^an  in  the  evening.  These  days  are  spoken  of  as 
having  began  with  an  evening,  ereh  (Greek  erebos),  from 
arab,  to  mingle  or  blend,  suggestive  ot  darkness.  They 
are  said  to  have  ended  in  a  morning,  hoker,  in  the  primary 
sense  meaning  to  cleave,  separate,  therefore  to  distinguish, 
suggestive  of  light.  Thus  they  began  in  a  blending,  dusk 
or  darkness,  and  ended  in  a  parting,  dawn  or  light.  Such  ' 
is  clearly  the  root  idea  conveyed  by  the  language  em- 
ployed. Thus  the  first  day  vas  a  period,  however  long, 
that  commenced  in  darkness  and  ended  in  light  as  com- 
pared with  its  beginning,  however  we  may  explain  its 
nature.  And  light  itself  was  the  newly  created  principle, 
or  energy,  or  shall  we  say  essence,  of  that  first  day.  It 
began  in  unorganized  chaos,  upon  which  Ood's  spirit 
moved,  and  ended  in  elementary  organisation  and  in  light, 
compared  with  which  its  beginning  was  night  or  evening. 
Similarly  might  we  describe  the  other  days,  if  that  entered 
into  our  specific  purpose.  It  might,  however,  be  added 
that  the  morning  closing  one  day  was  apparently  as  even- 
ing compared  with,  or  perhaps  the  evening  of,  the  succeed- 
^g  day,  as  in  an  ascending  series. 

We  apeak  equally  phenomenally  and  even  indefinitely 
when  we  speak  of  the  morning  of  the  world  and  of  the 
dawn  of  history  or  of  civilisation,  as  also  when  we  speak 
ot  the  evening  of  time.  We  even  speak  of  life's  sunset  and 
of  superstition's  night.  And  we  should  rather  look  for 
such  pictorial  language  in  a  narrative  that  comes  to  us 
from  that  primitive  age  and  through  the  medium  of  that 
imaginative  Oriental  mind.  These  days  are  therefore  not 
marked  in  the  sacred  chronicle  by  sunrise  and  sunset. 
Indeed,  the  fact  that  in  the  great  creative  panorama  the 
snn  itself  is  not  made  to  appear  until  the  fourth  day,  as 
already  noted,  is  wonderfully  in  accord  with  the  most 
plausible  theories  of  modem  science,  as  might  be  shown,  if 
space  permitted.  Of  that  first  creative  triad  it  could  be 
said. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


411  BUHotheca  8acra 

No  suiirlse,  and  no  aunset,  too, 

Marked  tboBe  creative  days; 
No  spinning  worlds  seemed  moving  tbrougb 

Vaat  orbits  In  void  space. 

What,  then,  was  the  abeolnte  length  of  those  creative 
daye,  if  they  were  not  ordinary  days  of  twenty-four  hoars 
each?  Ghriatian  geologists  and  astronomers,  in  attempt- 
ing to  reconcile  the  record  of  Qenesis  with  what  they 

'  believe  they  can  read  in  the  strata  of  the  earth  and  in  the 
heavenly  bodies,  have  made  many  guesses  at  their  probable 
length,  and  have  even  made  elaborate  calcalations.  But 
all  their  calculations  must  fail  in  determining  anything 
like  their  probable  length,  for  they  are  based  upon  data 
that  must  necessarily  remain  uncertain  as  premises  for 
conclusive  reasoning.  The  so-called  cataclysms,  or  the 
special  creative  acts  to  begin  new  orders  of  uatnre,  as  well 
as  the  forces  and  cooditions  that  were  unequal  in  different 
ages,  make  all  calculations  very  inconclusive.  Moreover, 
of  what  avail  are  human  calculations  of  the  duration  of 
periods  that  determine  divine  acts!    In  other  words,  here 

'  we  are  in  the  region  of  the  mysterious  and  uncertain. 
However,  those  creative  days  were  unquestionably  indef- 
inite periods  of  time,  and  no  doubt  equivalent  to  ages  aa 
measured  by  the  cycles  of  our  sun,  and  probably  of  unequal 
length  or  duration,  as  we  have  suggested.  And  it  is  not 
probable  that  science  will  be  able  to  throw  much  real  light 
upon  this  subject  beyond  the  fourth,  or  at  best  the  third, 
day;  and  even  upon  tlie  fifth  day  it  can  not  throw  a  great 
deal  of  light.  We  may  therefore  safely  accept  the  sacred 
account  of  creation  in  Genesis  for  what  it  is  apparently 
intended  to  teach. 

We  have  thus  briefly  considered  the  matter  of  a  proper 
approach  to,  and  interpretation  of,  the  sources  of  informa- 
tion on  this  subject,  as  also  the  time-element  which  has 
caused  so  much  misunderstanding;  and  further  details, 
especially  as  to  the  several  creative  acts  or  works  of  the 
successive  days,  would  lie  beyond  the  scope  and  purpose  of 
the  present  article. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE  DIVINE  TEA^fSCENDEKCB  • 

PROFESSOR  DAVID   FOSTER  ESTE8,  D.D. 
HAMILTON,  NEW   TOEK 

[The  paradoxes  of  science  are  matched  by  the  para- 
doxes of  theology.  Freedom  and  certainty,  immanence  and 
transcendence,  have  always  perplexed  systematic  theologi- 
ans. Their  hannonizatioo  seems  alwnt  as  difflcnlt  as  the 
squaring  of  the  circle.  Nevertheless,  there  is  an  ultimate 
harmony. 

In  accordance  with  the  policy  of  Bibliotheca  Sacra  to 
present  both  sides  of  important  doctrines  which  are  in  dis- 
pute (illiistrated  by  the  articles  upon  Millenarianism  in 
the  July  No.),  we  are  glad  to  present  the  accompanying 
paper  as  a  counterpart  to  the  one,  by  the  same  eminent 
theologian,  on  Divine  Immanence  which  we  published  last 
year  (July,  1918,  pp.  399-428). 

These  two  papers  state  both  sides  of  the  subject  in  a  man- 
ner to  merit  universal  attention,  and  should  do  much  to 
justify  faith  in  both  aspects  of  God's  inscrutable  but  inspir- 
ing attributes  here  brought  to  view. — Editor.] 

In  these  days  it  is  as  important  to  assert  and  to  guard 
the  doctrine  of  the  Divine  Transcendence  as  to  emphasize 
the  Divine  Immanence.  Over  against  the  many  who  deny 
or  ignore,  the  doctrine  must  be  asserted  as  an  important, 
an  essential  part  of  the  truth  of  G^od;  white  over  against 
the  many  who  exaggerate  or  misapprehend,  it  must  be 
stated  with  clearness  and  accuracy,  in  order  that  these 
errors,  which  presumably  are  as  perennial  as  multiform, 
may  yet  be  minimized  so  far  as  possible.  In  the  progress 
of  human  thought  these  two  ideas  of  immanence  and  tran- 
scendence have  too  often  stood  over  against  each  other  as 
if  challenging  the  world  to  choose  between  them.  In  the 
Intellectual  and  spiritual  experiences  of  individual  think- 
ers the  emphasis  on  the  one  or  the  other  has  too  often  led 
to  what  has  been  practically  Pantheism  or  practically 
Deism.  Those  who  have  come  to  combine  the  two  ideas 
•  Copyright.  1919.  D.  F.  Bstei. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


416  B^Uotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

have  perhaps  more  often  made  the  pilgrimage  from  tran- 
Bceadence  to  immanence  J^ao  from  immanence  to  tran- 
scendence; jel  Bach  is  tkeVogne  and  ascendancy  of  the 
idea  of  immanence  to-day,  at  least  in  popular  literature  and 
common  speech,  that  it  may  be  better  in  this  discnssioD  to 
take  the  hitherto  less  traveled  road,  and,  assuming  the 
tact  of  the  Divine  Immanence,  to  consider  the  grounds  for 
holding  also  to  the  Divine  Transcendence  and  the  signifl- 
cance  and  importance  of  this  truth. 

To  those  who  accept  the  truth  of  immanence  it  often 
seems  in  itself  sufficient  and  satisfying.  But,  however 
vital  monogamy  may  be  to  the  welfare  of  society,  intel- 
lectual monogamy  is  no  virtue;  and  they  greatly  err  who 
act  as  if  the  Mosaic  prohibition,  "  Thou  shalt  not  take  a 
woman  to  her  sister,  to  be  a  rival  to  her,"  should  be  ex- 
tended to  the  realm  of  ideas.  Let  it  be  assumed  with  all 
the  positiveness  yon  will,  that  in  all  the  phenomena,  force, 
and  progress  of  nature  Ood  is  and  acts ;  that  in  all  the  uni- 
verse which  we  see  with  the  eye,  the  telescope,  the  micro- 
scope, and  in  all  its  extension  so  far  as  thought  can  wing 
its  way  into  space  or  the  scientific  imagination  can  trace 
the  infinitesimal,  everywhere,  whatever  else  we  find  or 
miss,  everywhere  we  may  always  certainly  find  God  im- 
manent in  all.  But  is  this  all?  Is  this  truth  the  whole 
truth  about  God?  Does  the  fact  of  immanence  exhaust 
the  Divine  reality?  In  the  minds  of  many,  to  be  sure,  by 
use  of  the  mental  faculties  or  because  they  are  not  used — 
all  this  matters  not — immanence  is  the  sole  idea,  the  son  of 
truth  which  shines  so  solitary  and  suffici^t  that  not  even 
a  moon  is  needed.  But  such  narrowness  of  intellectaal 
processes  and  limitation  of  consequent  results  is  baneful 
as  well  as  unnecessary.  We  get  on  fairly  well  in  our  sys- 
tem with  a  single  snn  pins  the  occasional  help  of  moon  and 
stars ;  we  most  do  so,  for  it  is  all  we  can  have.  But  how 
much  richer,  more  beautiful,  more  efficient,  must  be  the 
case  of  those  who  live  in  a  system  of  binary  stars  as  we 
call  them,  binary  suns  as  they  must  see  them,  each  sup- 
plementing and  reinforcing  the  other!    So  all  twin  truths 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Diviue  Transcendence  417 

helpfaUy  aupplement  and  refinforce  each  other  and  marked- 
I7  the  pair  ot  complementary  troths  we  now  note. 

Bat  perhaps,  in  altering  on  this  diecussioa,  it  shoold 
first  be  inquired,  Wtiat  is  the  natnre  of  this  idea  which  is 
complementary  to  immanence?  What  is  properly  meant 
by  the  word  "  transcendence  "  as  applied  to  the  Deity  ?  Of 
the  definition  in  the  general  dictionariee,  certainly  none 
is  better  than  that  of  "The  Century,"  which  defines 
"transcendent"  as  "transcending  the  universe  of  matter; 
not  essentially  connected  with  the  universe ;  not  cosmic :  as, 
a  transcendent  deity."  If  this  is  read  as  complementary, 
not  as  alternative,  to  immanence,  it  will  prove  helpful  and 
quite  satisfactory;  otherwise  it  will  prove  misleading. 
Much  better  is  Professor  Ormond's,  in  Baldwin's  "  Diction- 
ary of  Philosophy,"  which  says  that  transcendence  is  "  the 
doctrine  that  Ood,  in  his  proper  being  and  essential  nature, 
is  prior  to  and  above  the  world ;  or  that  he  hag  reality  in 
himself  apart  from  his  works."  But  even  these  state- 
ments are  not  beyond  criticism ;  as  the  ideas  suggested  by 
"  prior,"  "  above,"  and  "  reality  "  are  not  an  essential  part 
of  the  doctrine  of  transcendence,  even  though  it  may  prac- 
tically be  presumed  that  they  are  always  found  in  con- 
nection with  it.  To  the  mind  of  the  writer  the  primary 
idea  of  transcendence  is,  that  Ood  is  not  wholly  and  solely 
in  the  universe  which  he  has  created ;  but  that,  on  the  con- 
trary, in  nature,  in  character,  and  in  activity,  his  relation 
to  the  nniverse  does  not  exhaust  him  or,  indeed,  fully  ex- 
press him;  that  (using  the  words  in  no  quantitative  or 
spatial  sense)  Ood,  who  is  actively  in  the  nniverse,  is  also 
b^ond  it;  that  it  does  not  measure  him,  but  that  he  is 
more  than  can  find  scope  and  play  in  hia  immanent  relation 
to  his  universe.' 

■A  oolleapie  has  ausgeated,  as  a  possibly  helpful  parallel  <so 
far  a«  Uie  phTSlcal  may  Illustrate  the  spiritual),  the  Tarlous  rela- 
tions of  electricity  In  the  houaehold.  Its  most  commoD  use  la  for 
light,  and  It  la  coneelvahle  that  some  might  unconsciously  assume 
that  the  lamp  exhauita  the  possibilities  of  electricity.     But  cer- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


418  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

For  the  logical  porpoaee  of  definition  this  may  be  held  to 
be  sufficient,  bnt  another  element  is  so  much  a  part  of  the 
facts  iu  the  case,  and  so  implied  in  the  derivation  of  the 
word,  that  it  finds  a  place  in  many  definitions;  and  conse- 
quently it  is  to  be  presumed  that  it  is  a  part  of  the  con- 
ception of  transcendence  as  ordinarily  held.  To  transcend 
is  frequently  thought  of  as  to  be  not  only  more  but  also 
superior,  and  so  the  definition  in  the  Webster  Dictionary 
includes  the  statement  that  God  "  is  exalted  above  "  crea- 
tion. It  is  this  element  of  superiority  which  Dr.  Clarbe,  in 
his  discussion  of  transcendence,*  dwells  upon  to  the  prac- 
tical exclusion  of  everything  else,  such  a  sentence  as  this 
giving  the  keynote  to  his  treatment  of  the  subject :  "  The 
universe  stands  over  against  him  but  not  as  his  equal :  he 
stands  over  against  the  universe,  but  as  one  who  surpasses 
it :  and  there  are  qualities  in  which  we  can  distinctly  un- 
derstand that  his  superiority  consists."  But,  unless  on  the 
ground  that  common  thought  has  permanently  combined 
the  ideas  of  more  and  better  (or  shall  we  rather  say  that 
lack  of  thought  bas  inextricably  confused  them?),  there  is 
no  good  reason  for  making  the  element  of  superiority  an  es- 
sential part  of  the  definition  of  transcendence.  Perhaps, 
however,  it  is  actually  there ;  and  if  so  it  will  not  essential- 
ly modify  the  relations  of  the  present  discussion,  although, 
at  first  at  least,  it  will  not  be  emphasized. 

Now  on  what  ground  may  we  who  are  believers  in  the 
Divine  Immanence  believe  also  in  the  Divine  Transcend- 
ence, assert  it,  and,  still  more,  rest  and  bnild  on  it?  In 
considering  these  grounds  it  may  be  well,  first,  to  note  the 
familiar  fact,  that,  on  the  whole  subject  of  the  existence, 
nature,  character,  and  works  of  God,  we  do  not  have  pos- 
itive and  conclusive  proofs.*    Our  faith  is  faith,  not  un- 

talnl7  moBt  know  that  the  same  current  can  also  give  heat,  power, 
and  therapeutic  eBects.  No  one  of  these,  nor  the  sum  of  tbem.  ex.- 
haustB  the  electric  potency:  It  la  more  than  they:  so  to  speak.  It 
transcends  them  all. 

'The  Christian  Doctrine  of  God.  pp.  810-330. 

•  The  case  has  been  well  stated  by  Proleuor  Ladd  (Bib.  Sac,  vol. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Dwine  Tnmecendence  419 

TeaBODable,  to  be  sure,  but  not  based  directly  on  logical 
demonstratioD.  If  it  were  thoa  baaed,  it  would  not  be 
faith  bat  knowledge,  and  wonld  wholly  lack  the  moral 
value  which  we  rightly  attach  to  faith.  It  is  often  over- 
looked tbat  there  would  be  no  more  ethical  significance  in 
the  acceptance  of  positive  knowledge  even  as  to  God  him- 
self than  there  ie  in  acceptance  of  the  multiplicatioD  table 
or  of  the  annual  calendar.  On  the  other  baud,  it  ia  do 
more  to  be  felt  that  Christian  theism  is  counter  to  reason 
or  without  reasons. 

We  shall  not  begin  this  discussion  with  what  may  be 
called  the  coemological  argument,  even  thou^  it  is  to  be 
acknowledged  that  in  certain  relations  there  is  great  force 
in  the  course  of  ailment  which  ends  with  the  recognition 
of  a  mysterious  power  which  Herbert  Spencer  foimd  beyond 
phenomena,  Piske's  "  infinite  Power  that  makes  for  right- 
eousness." A  better  place  to  begin  the  present  discussion, 
the  first  foundation  stone  to  be  laid,  is  a  development  of 
the  argument  from  analogy  by  which  the  Divine  Imma- 
nence is  to  the  mind  of  the  writer  rendered  most  plausible. 
If  we  should  think  of  all  the  energy  of  the  universe  as  the 
forthputting  of  the  power  of  the  resident  spirit,  on  the 
ground  tbat  all  the  force  which  we  know  is  due  to  our  own 
personal  spirit,  we  shall  be  justified,  is  it  not  better  to  say, 
we  are  constrained,  to  carry  the  analogy  further,  and  from 
our  own  conscious  experience  to  infer  the  Divine  Tran- 
scendence as  mnch  as  the  Divine  Immanence.  We  our- 
selves act  on  and  through  matter,  if  not  originating  force, 
at  any  rate  controlling  and  directing  it;  and,  neverthe- 
less, these  activities,  the  changed  conditions,  the  modifica- 
tions of  matter,  while  at  their  best  our  spirits  may  find 
more  or  less  adequate  expression  in  them,  do  not  exhaust 
our  possibilities.  The  man  is  always  more  than  his  deeds 
xzzlT.  p.  IS):  "The  concept  of  God,  then.  Is  not  one,  the  ob- 
jective vallditr  of  which  can  be  tested  solely  by  the  success  or 
failure  of  any  number  of  arguments,  coneidered  merely  ae  argu- 
ments, along  their  different  lines.  It  la  rather  a  centre  upon  which 
converge  many  lines,  not  only  of  argument,  but  also  of  Intuition, 
feeling,  and  purpose." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


420  BibUotheca  Sacn  [Oct 

at  tbeir  largest;  he  is  always  more  than  his  work  in  the 
world.  Perhaps  in  no  way  can  a  man  make  fuller  ez- 
presaion  of  wliat  is  in  him  tiian  does  the  skilled  violinist  in 
the  use  ot  his  violin.  It  will  qniver  with  his  donbts  and 
fears :  it  will  wail  ont  hla  sorrow :  it  wUl  sing  his  Joy,  nntfl 
we  are  justified  in  saying,  as  we  do,  that  in  hearing  the 
tones  of  this  marveloiis  instrument  we  have  heard  the  man. 
Tet  in  how  much  is  he  greater  than  the  expression  which  he 
has  found,  more  than  his  music,  the  man  quite  as  much  be- 
yond and  above  as  in  his  violin!  If  any  needs  to  leam 
the  truth  of  transcendence,  let  him  team  from  this  analogy. 
The  apt  pupil  will  find  in  himself  his  first  lesson.  If  the 
master  is  always  more  than  his  music,  Shakespeare  than 
his  dramas,  Michelangelo  than  his  "  Moses,"  the  man  ever 
greater  than  his  every  work  and  all  his  works,  we  should 
1>e  dull  indeed  if  we  held  that  the  Great  Artificer  had  ez- 
liausted  himself  in  the  universe  in  which  he  continually 
works,  and  that  he  had  no  character  or  activity  lieyond  it. 

Further,  conscience  here  reinforces  consciousness.  It  is 
not  safe  to  say,  with  Piatt,  that  the  conception  of  tran- 
scendence is  due  to  the  notion  that  "  Holiness  has  always 
spelled  separation  " ;  and  that  "  transcendence  applied  to 
(3od  has  l)ecome  identical  with  His  separation  from  men."  ' 
Ttus  is  true  neither  of  the  meaning  of  the  word  nor  of  the 
history  of  the  conception.  But  it  is  true  that  the  con- 
science of  man  has  felt  a  sense  of  responsibility  to  one  who 
is  more  than  the  world  of  relation ;  and  thus,  it  may  be 
repeated,  conscience  reCnforces  consciousness. 

The  view  which  has  just  been  stated  as  a  legitimate,  not 
to  say  necessary,  inference  from  the  facts  of  our  own  con- 
sciousness, has  been  reached  as  if  by  intuition  by  count- 
less thousands  of  souls  in  every  age.  If  it  may  be  asserted, 
as  men  of  late  are  in  the  habit  of  repeating,  that  "  man  is 
incurably  religions,"  It  may  be  similarly  asserted  that  the 
object  of  his  religion  is  invariably  transcendent.*    To  be 

'Immanence  and  Christian  Thougbt.  p.  61. 

■As  Wanchauer  aars  In  his  book,  which  waa  written  by  one  who 
emphasizes  Immanence  In  order  to  guard  acalnat  extravagant  mto- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Divine  Tranacendence  121 

Bore,  it  is  not  to  be  overlooked  that  certain  rdigious  sya- 
tenia  are  at  heart  pantheistie  philosophiee,  and  so  exclude 
transcendence;  but  at  the  same  time  it  is  to  be  ranembered 
that  in  all  the  ancient  rellgicHui,  wherever  the  religious 
element  vras  dominant,  from  the  crassest  animism  to  the 
most  spiritual  Judaism,  transcendence  was  the  controlling 
conception.  A»  Samuel  Browne  puts  it  in  his  remarkable 
book,  "  God  the  Known  and  the  Unknown " :  "  The  vast 
majority  for  a  long  time  past  have  been  possessed  with  aD 
idea  that  there  is  somewhere  a  Living  Qod  who  is  the 
Spirit  and  Life  of  all  that  is,  and  who  is  a  tme  Ferstm 
with  an  individuality  and  self-consciousness  of  his  own. 
.  .  .  the  persistence  of  the  main  idea  in  spite  of  the  inco- 
her^cy  of  its  details,  points  strongly  in  the  direction  of 
believing  that  it  rests  upon  a  foundation  in  fact."  *  Of 
coarse  the  fact  of  the  prevalence  of  this  idea  is  not  adduced 
as  in  any  positive  sense  demonstrative,  yet  it  should  be 
carefully  weighed.  It  may  well  be  insisted  that  as  the 
incurable  religiousness  of  man,  to  repeat  again  the  trite 
phrase,  cannot  reasonably  be  ignored  or  set  aside  without 
eonsideratiOD,  so  the  conception  of  transcendence  which 
is  inextricably  interwoven  with  the  idea  of  a  Qod  to  be 
worshiped  gains  a  CCTtain  degree  of  probability  from  the 
very  fact  of  its  prevalence,  for,  as  Fiske  says,  "  No  in- 
genuity of  argument  can  bring  as  to  believe  that  the  In- 
finite Sustainer  of  the  universe  will '  pat  us  to  permanoit 
intellectual  confusion.'"* 

Still  another  argument  may  be  drawn,  in  part  at  least, 
from  the  sphere  of  our  own  conscionsneBs.  In  oursdves 
we  find  the  elusive,  thus  far  absolutely  indefinable,  ele- 
ment or  sum  of  elements  which  1b  commonly  and  recog- 
nizably designated  as  personality.    Whatever  may  be  said 

use  of  that  trutb:  "It  1b,  In  short,  the  transcendeat  God  with 
whom  wo  are  concemod  tn  the  exercise  of  religion,  tor  as  Mr. 
Chesterton  puts  It  In  hla  own  manner  '  that  Jones  shall  worAlp 
the  god  within  blm  turns  out  ultimatelr  to  mean  that  Jones  shall 
worship  Jones'"  {Problems  of  Immanence,  p.  29). 

>  Qod  the  Known  and  the  Unknowu,  pp.  49,  61. 

■  The  Idea  of  Ood,  p.  138. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


422  BibUotkeca  Bacra  [Oct. 

about  it,  we  know  that  we  are  persons,  that  is,  that  we  are 
mora  than  machines  however  complicated  and  perfect,  that 
we  are  able  to  aee  the  good  and  desire  it,  and  that  we  are 
responsible  for  moral  choices.  Now  the  stream  can  Derer 
rise  higher  than  the  fountain,  nor  the  result  exceed  the 
cause.  '  It  will  then  be  absurd  if  we  do  not  assert  the  eth- 
ical personality  of  God,  his  love  of  good,  and  his  con- 
stantly free  choice  of  this  good.  If  so,  ve  must,  as  of 
coarse  has  been  tUl  of  late  the  universal  way  of  Christian 
thinkers,  correspondingly  assert  the  Divine  transcendence; 
for,  in  bis  immanent  relation  to  the  universe,  personality 
finds  little  room  for  its  ethical  side,  if  indeed  any  at  alL 
In  the  Quiverse  as  it  exists,  subject  to  its  physical  laws, 
there  is  force  but  not  freedom :  it  is  mighty  but  not  in  it- 
self moral.  For  aU  spiritual  and  ethical  ends,  —  for  love, 
(or  mercy,  for  justice,  even  for  intelligence  in  its  fullest 
sense,  —  we  must  posit  the  Divine  Transcendence. 

Now  thus  far  the  argument  has  been  mainly  logical  and 
analogical.  Can  we  find  any  historical  facts  which  to  some 
extent  verify,  and  in  so  far  justify,  the  psychological  analy- 
sis and  logical  inferences  which  have  been  su^ested?  For 
other  purposes  an  illustration  has  repeatedly  been  drawn 
from  the  cosmic  ether,  of  which  Fiske  says :  "  The  fath- 
omless abysses  of  space  .  .  are  filled  with  a  wonderful  sub- 
stance, unlike  any  of  the  forms  of  matter  which  we  can 
weigh  and  measure.  A  cosmic  jelly  almost  infinitely  hard 
and  elastic,  it  offers  at  the  same  time  no  appreciable  re- 
sistance to  the  movements  of  the  heavenly  bodies," '  and 
yet,  as  Dr.  Eells  has  forcibly  said :  "  If  we  cannot  weigh 
or  test  or  measure  this  medium,  how  do  ve  know  that  it 
exists?  What  is  the  proof  of  it?  '  Because  things  happen 
just  as  if  there  were  such  a  medium,  and  there  is  no  other 
way  to  account  for  their  happening.'  That  is  the  reason 
which  Science  gives.  Nothing  more  of  proof  than  that"  * 
Now  what  may  we  see  which  similarly  demands  and  con- 
firms the  conception  of  the  Divine  Transcendence?    Of 

■The  Idea  of  Qod,  pp.  145,  146. 

■Theology  at  the  Dawn  ot  the  Twentieth  Century,  p.  M. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Dwine  Tran$cendence  423 

course  wliat  ie  seen  always  depends  mncli  on  the  eye. 
There  are  always  those  that  seeing  see  and  in  no  wise  per- 
ceive, be  it  a  sunset,  a  painting,  a  virtue,  a  truth.  There 
are  three  questions  which  the  writer  often  insists  every 
man  is  bound  to  answer  tor  himself:  "Why  is  the  Bible 
unlike  every  other  book  ?  "  "  Why  was  Jesus  unlike  every 
other  man?  "  and  "  How  can  we  explain  the  passing  of  the 
soul  from  sin  to  holiness?"  Now  when  these  three  ques- 
tions are  rationally  answered  we  have  found  the  tran- 
scendent divine  activities  which  snfBciently  betoken  the 
transcendent  God  whom  we  would  tain  trace.  Or,  to  in- 
dicate another  sphere  where  we  may  find  ground  for  a 
similar  conclusion,  we  have  only  to  dwell  on  the  signifi- 
cance of  the  poet's  saying  that  "  the  history  of  the  world 
is  its  judgment,"  to  which  the  protoundest  students  of  the 
philosophy  of  history  probably  agree.  But  what  must  fol- 
low from  that  conviction?  Nothing  less  than  the  further 
conviction  ttiat  there  is  One  on  high  who  in  some  sense  and 
measure  transcends  his  changeless  immanent  activities  to 
bring  to  pass  his  great  ends  tor  the  race. 

As  a  last  ground  ot  confidence  in  this  truth  to  be  ad- 
duced at  the  present  time,  it  may  be  remembered  that  we 
find  God  or  he  finds  us  and  we  relate  ourselves  to  him  spir- 
itually, for,  as  Illingworth  fairly  states  the  case,  "We  do 
not  start  with  a  mere  conception  of  God,  but  with  what 
may  practically  be  called  a  perception  of  him," '  and  it  so, 
then  he  must  be  transcendent.  Nor  is  this  an  appeal  to 
the  mystic  only.  It  matters  not  what  intermediaries  there 
may  have  been  in  condition  fulfilled  and  blessing  l)e- 
stowed.  The  extremest  sacramentarian  who  allows  only 
the  most  distant  and  indirect  approach  to  God,  the  ex- 
tremest Bitachlian,  to  choose  an  example  of  quite  another 
sort,  to  whose  mind  the  divine  blessings  are  mediated  only 
through  the  Church,  just  as  much  as  the  extremest  mys- 
tic, believes  that  there  is  one  whose  presence  and  power 
are  not  limited  to  the  processes  of  the  universe  as  a  whole, 
'Divine  Tnuucmdence,  p.  88. 
Vol.  UCXYI.    No.  304.    3 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


4Si  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

bat  may  be  as  really  traced  outeide  them  aa  in  them.* 
Whoever  cries  in  faith,  "  Oh !  that  I  knew  where  I  mi^t 
find  him ! ",  every  believer  that  prayer  is  answered,  everr 
loyal  confessor  of  Jesus  as  Savioar  and  Lord,  every  one 
who  repeats  the  turiversal  Christian  Credo,  "  I  believe  in 
the  Holy  Ghost,"  each  one,  every  one,  thereby  acknowl- 
edges his  faith,  which  is  onr  faith  too,  in  the  transcmd- 
euce  of  him  who  is  also  the  immanent  Qod.  The  instincts 
of  the  race  are  confirmed  by  the  experiences  of  the  soul ' 
as  by  the  events  of  history.  If  we  are  ourselves  snch  believ- 
ers and  confessors,  we  need  no  further  confirmation,  for  we 
have  known  the  fellowship  of  the  transcendent  God,  "  Oar 
fellowship  is  with  the  Father,  and  with  his  Son  Jesns 
Christ." 

There  may  well  be  noted  further  some  of  the  great  facta 
and  truths  which  are  made  possible  by  the  Divine  Tran- 
scendence, bnt  which  in  turn,  grow  dim  or  disappear  when 

*The  nature  of  the  communion  wltb  Ood  when  attained  la  de- 
scribed by  H.  O.  Wella  in  words  that  are  better  worth  quoting 
because  he  falls  to  hold  so  much  other  truth;  and  thus  bts  tes- 
tlmoQT  to  this  truth,  if  anTthlng,  gains  weight:  "Ood  comes.  This 
cardtoal  experience  Is  an  undoubtlng.  Immediate  sense  of  God.  It 
Is  the  attainment  of  an  absolute  certainty  that  one  Is  not  alone  In 
oneself.  It  Is  as  If  one  was  touched  at  erery  point  by  a  being  aUn 
to  oneself,  sympathetic,  beyond  measure  wiser,  steadfast  and  pure 
In  aim.  It  la  completer  and  more  Intimate,  but  It  Is  like  standing 
side  by  side  with  and  touching  some  one  that  we  love  and  trust 
completely"  (Qod  the  luTlslble  King,  p.  29). 

"The  trust  worthiness  of  this  experience  is  most  helpfully  con- 
firmed by  IlUngwortb's  appeal  to  "tbe  best  and  noblest  of  our 
race,  men  and  women,  who  In  every  age  and  In  every  rank  and 
station,  and  endowed  with  every  degree  and  kind  of  Intellectual 
capacity,  have  lived  the  lives  of  saints  and  heroes,  or  died  the 
death  of  martyrs,  and  furthered  by  their  action  and  passion, 
and.  as  they  trusted,  by  their  prayers,  the  material,  moral,  sodal, 
spiritual  welfare  of  mankind,  solely  la  reliance  on  their  personal 
Intercourse  with  Ood,  .  .  .  strictly  a  multitude  '  whom  no  man  can 
number':  — competent,  capable,  sane,  of  no  one  type  or  tempera- 
ment, as  old  as  authentic  history,  as  numerous  as  ever  in  the  world 
to-day;  a  far  more  searctalngly  sifted  and  universally  extended 
body  of  observers  than  can  be  quoted  In  behalf  of  any  sln^e  sci- 
entific foct"   (Personality  Human  and  DIvme,  pp.  133,  1S4). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Divine  Tramcmdence  425 

this  trath  ib  overlooked  or  eet  aside.  For  example,  it  is 
ODe  of  the  commonplaces  of  diecuBsion  in  the  last  few  yeara 
that  "  the  modern  man  "  has  been  caring  little  about  sin, 
sin  in  general,  hia  own  sin  in  particular.  If  proof  is  needed, 
a  few  possibly  familiar  quotations  will  serve.  Sir  Oliver 
Lodge  said  in  1904:  "As  a  matter  of  fact,  the  higher  man 
of  to-day  is  not  worrying  about  his  sins  at  all,"  *  while 
still  earlier  Oladstone  is  reported  to  have  answered  in  re- 
ply to  a  question  as  to  what  he  considered  the  greatest 
need  of  the  age,  "A  sense  of  sin."  *  Principal  Porsyth  has 
said :  "  Our  talk  of  siu  is  palpably  ceasing  to  t>e  the  talk 
of  broken  and  contrite  men  " ;  and  again,  "  Our  speech  of 
siu  has  not  behind  it  the  note  of  '  my  sin,  my  sin ! '  "  ■  It 
may  equally  be  said  that  the  appreciation  of  sin  has  passed 
out  of  the  message  of  the  pulpit  as  well  as  out  of  the  study 
of  the  philosopher,  the  talk  of  the  street  and,  as  Forsyth 
implies,  the  closet  of  the  believer.  Paul  told  the  Athenian 
sages  of  his  time,  Ood  "  commands  men  that  they  should 
all  every  where  repent " ;  but  how  widely  or  how  loudly 
has  that  assertion  been  echoed  in  the  last  generation?  It 
is  scarcely  necessary  to  add  that  the  idea  of  penalty  has 
gone  of  late  even  more  completely  than  that  of  sin.  It  has 
been  most  interesting  to  note  the  positively  hostile  atti- 
tude, which  has  been  widespread  as  well,  toward  anything 
in  any  degree  resembling  punishment.  Ood  cannot  possi- 
bly inflict,  tbe  writer  has  often  been  assured,  any  penalty 
at  all  beyond  the  usual,  not  to  say  invariable,  consequences 
of  sin. 

If  it  were  possible  to  argue  conclusively  from  a  single 
example,  it  might  be  worth  while  to  attempt  to  settle  how 
far  Emerson's  tendency  toward  pantheism  occasioned  or 
intensified  the  iudilFereuce  to  sin  with  which  even  Morl^ 
charged  him.    How  could  he  who  wrote 

"  If  tbe  red  Blayer  think  he  Blays,  .  .  . 
They  know  not  well  the  subtle  ways 
I  keep," 

'Hlbbert  Jonniia,  1901,  p.  466.  *  Orchard,  Modem  Theories  of 
Sin,  p.  ID.    'Person  and  PlMe  <rf  Jesus  Christ,  pp.  SI,  62. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


426  Bibliotheoa  <8acra  [Oct. 

appreciate  duly  haman  responsibility  and  the  personal 
guilt  of  personal  sin  before  a  just  Ood?  To  consider  how 
far  tn  general,  as  may  hare  been  tme  in  this  case,  a  one- 
sided emphasis  on  the  Divine  Immanence  has  l>een  respon- 
sible for  the  slackening  of  the  sense  of  sin,  lies  somewhat 
OQtside  the  present  discnssion;  but  it  may  safely  be  as- 
serted that  it  has  been  influential,  especially  when  rein- 
forced by  another  idea,  in.  this  case  wholly  false,  namely, 
that  we  may  infer  from  the  evolutionary  process  that  so- 
called  sin  is  not  morally  evil  but  is  merely  an  inevitable 
residuum  inherited  from  our  beasts  of  ancestors  and  in 
course  of  elimination.  Another  aspect  of  this  relation 
of  false  theology  to  bad  ethics  was  suggested  during  an 
interview  with  a  justly  respected  Oerman  Professor  of 
Theology  in  the  year  1910.  Referring  to  the  widespread 
controversy  of  that  date  as  to  the  historicity  of  Jesns,  he 
expressed  his  positive  conviction  that  that  campaign,  as 
we  may  well  call  it  since  it  corresponded  closely  in  many 
ways  to  a  well-foaght  political  campaign  in  this  country, 
was  financed  by  the  "  Monismus  Bund,"  in  order  to  break 
down  among  the  people  at  large  the  sense  of  the  sanctions 
of  morality.  Of  course  we  may  not  tarry  to  investigate  at 
all  the  influence  which  the  monistic  philosophy,  with  its 
denial  of  any  Divine  Transcendence,  has  exercised  on  the 
sense,  and  consequently  on  the  practice,  of  sin.  It  may 
be  that  the  conspicuous  flowering  and  fruitage  of  sinful- 
ness which  we  liave  witnessed  in  the  war  of  these  terrible 
years  will  bring  back  to  the  nations  a  sense  of  sin  and  of 
its  exceeding  sinfulness.* 

'  A  striking  example  of  failure  to  appreciate  the  dlOereace  be- 
tween the  moral  And  the  Immoral  is  found  In  the  conclusion  of 
Mr.  Wells's  "First  and  Laat  Things"  (p.  307):  "In  the  last  re- 
sort I  do  not  care  whether  I  am  seated  on  a  throne  or  drunk  or 
dying  In  a  kitchen.  I  follow  my  leading.  In  the  ultimate  I  know, 
though  I  canuot  prove  ray  knowledge  In  any  way  whatever,  that 
every  thing  Is  right  and  all  things  mine."  Doubtless  this  view 
was  Intimately  related  to  his  failure  at  that  time  to  recognise  the 
existence  of  any  transcendent  Ood  to  whom  we  are  responsible. 
We  cannot  but  wonder  whether  the  author  of  "Mr.  BritUug"  and 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Idl9]  The  Divine  Transcendence  4^ 

But  for  the  sense  of  Bin  to  be  effective,  the  idea  of  a 
transcendent  Ood  must  again  take  its  place  in  the  thoughts 
of  men.  It  immanence  be  the  last  and  only  word  of  philo- 
sophical speculation  and  religious  convictioo,  then  there 
can  be  no  real  sense  of  sin,  for  there  can  be  no  moral  law 
and  DO  personal  responsibility.  It  cannot  plausibly  be 
asserted  that  hedonism,  or  even  pragmatic  endiemonism, 
would  be  a  sufBcient  foundation  for  ethics;  that  men  would 
see  advantage  enough  arising  from  doing  duty  to  make 
them  do  it,  however  unpleasant  and  difficult.  That  we 
should  then  have  only  determinism,  with  utter  indifference 
morally  as  to  whether  red  slayer  or  slain,  Hun  and  Turk 
or  Belgian  victim  and  Armenian  martyr,  is  practically 
demonstrated  by  the  very  vogue  of  that  notioo,  at  least  in 
theory.  But  if  as  responsible  persons  we  have  to  do  with 
a  God  who  is  in  the  highest  sense  personal,  beyond  and 
above  the  phenomena  which  are  bound  fast  in  the  net  of 
antecedent  and  consequent,  who  has  established  right  and 
is  himself  just  and  righteous  to  reward  or  punish,  then 
we  have  what  not  only  justifies  but  inexorably  demands  a 
sense  of  sin  and  the  duty  of  repenting  of  all  sin  and  for- 
saking it. 

This  may  suggest,  in  passing,  how  little  the  science  and 
ordinary  teaching  of  ethics  have  been  Christianized.  It  is 
often  asserted  that  we  can  properly  have  no  Christian  sci- 
ences. Of  course  sciences  which  deal  only  with  phenomena 
cannot  be  something  peculiar  which  we  may  call  Christian. 
If  ECaecfeel  had  kept  his  atheism  out  of  his  biology,  it  would 
have  been  the  same  as  that  of  the  most  devout  believer. 
But  this  is  not  true  of  ethics,  for  it  should  I>e  insisted 
that  ethics  without  the  positive  introduction  of  ideas 
which  are  specifically  Christian  is  "  Hamlet "  with  Ham- 
let left  out.  For  example,  there  is  needed  for  ethics  the 
conception  of  a  transcendent  God  who  gave  and  admin- 
isters the  moral  law,  to  whom  we  are  responsible,  against 
whom  and  whom  only  we  sin.    And  let  it  be  added  that 

"Ood  the  Invisible  King"  baa  learned  anytliing  ret  on  tbe  sub- 
ject of  ethics  and  stn. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


428  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

we  need  also  teaching  as  to  the  standard  and  the  power 
and  the  promise  of  GhriBtian  holinees.  To  the  mind  ot  the 
writer  ethical  teaching  which  is  merely  philosophical  and 
not  also  Christian,  that  is,  including  the  Christian  facte 
and  the  Christian  motives,  is  aadlj  ineffective  becaase  it 
tries  to  mount  to  the  skies  using  but  a  single  wing. 

Philosophy  so  far  as  it  limits  itself  to  the  phenomena 
furnished  by  the  natural  sciences  (in  which  is  of  coarse 
to  be  included  modem  psychology)  may  perhaps  need  to 
seek  no  further  into  the  nature  and  relations  of  God  than 
to  recognize  his  immanence:  ethics,  as  has  been  noted, 
needs  to  rest  rather  on  the  recognition  of  this  transcend- 
ence, and  it  must  now  be  added  that  religion,  above  all, 
Christianity,  finds  his  transcendent  activities  in  every  spir- 
itual relation  with  which  it  deals.  It  is  nearly  exact  to 
say  that  immanence  is  the  philosophical  conception,  tran- 
scendence the  religious  conception.*  It  may  be  added, 
that,  while  without  immanence  philosophy  is  incurably 
lamed,  without  transcendence  religion  can  make  no  prog- 
ress at  all.  Christianity  implies  the  Divine  Transcend- 
ence in  its  every  demand  and  every  promise. 

If  the  moral  law  of  ethics  and  the  correlated  responsi- 
bility of  the  individual  involve  diverse  activities  and  re- 
lations which  ontmn  immanence,  it  is  still  plainer  that 
the  religious  demand  for  repentance  and  the  promise  of 
forgiveness  on  that  condition  necessarily  imply  the  same. 
The  universe  of  cause  and  effect  knows  no  forgiveness,  and 
some  extravagant  devotees  of  evolution  and  immanence 
have  told  us  over  and  over  that  there  never  is  or  can  be 

'  Aubrey  Moore  puts  tbe  case  Uius:  "  Rellgton  demands  as  the 
very  condition  ot  Its  existence  a  Ood  who  transcends  the  universe; 
philosophy  ss  Imperiously  requires  his  Immanence  in  nature.  .  .  . 
But,"  he  adds,  "what  we  find  1b,  that  though  Philosophy  (mean- 
Ing  by  that  the  exercise  of  the  speculative  reason  In  abetractlon 
from  morals  and  religion},  the  more  fully  It  realizes  the  Imroa* 
nenoe  of  Ood,  the  more  It  tends  to  deny  the  transcendence,  religion 
not  only  has  no  quarrel  with  the  doctrine  of  Immanence,  but  the 
bigber  the  religion,  the  more  unreservedly  it  asserts  Immanence 
as  a  truth  dear  to  religion  lUelf  "  (Lux  Mundl,  pp.  77,  78). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1019]  The  Divine  Transcendence  429 

place  for  repentance,  that  forgiveness  is  impossible.  The; 
vould  insist  that  every  man  must  repeat  in  helplessness 
what  Pilate  said  in  wilfulneas,  "  What  I  have  written,  I 
have  written."  Lacking  the  determinism  of  Fitzgerald's 
Omar,  they  voald  apply  to  every  man  in  reference  to  his 
own  action  the  declaration, 

"The  Moving  Finger  writes;    and,  havtng  writ, 
Movea  on:  nor  all  your  piety  nor  wit 

SbaU  lure  It  back  to  cancel  bait  a  line, 
Nor  all  your  tears  wasb  out  a  word  of  It" 

Over  against  this,  Christianity  sets  the  falfillment  of  the 
prophet's  promise,  "  I  will  forgive  their  iniquities,  and 
their  sin  will  I  remember  no  more."  • 

Forgiveness  is  the  mercy  of  one  who  loves;  and  this  may 
well  lead  us  to  the  broader  and  deeper  thought  of  infinite 
love  as  the  most  essential  attribute  of  the  eternal  Ood.  To 
be  sure,  some  have  been  ready  to  say,  "  Now  abide  love, 
justice,  holiness,  and  the  greatest  of  these  is  holiness,"  but 
I  feel  sare  tbat  sooner  or  later  all  will  be  ready  for  the 
Johannine  judgment,  "  The  greatest  is  love,  God  is  love." 
Yet  if  we  let  slip  the  conception  of  transcendence,  we  ren- 
der it  impossible  helpfully  to  assert  the  eternal  love  of  the 
Divine  Father.  Personality  will  have  vanished,  and  who 
can  say  of  one  whom  we  do  not  conceive  as  personal,  "  He 
is  love  "  ? 

When  vanishes  from  the  minds  of  men  the  transcendent 

'It  Is  only  from  Christianity  tbat  Mr.  Wells,  however  uncon- 
Bclons  of  his  debt,  can  have  learned  his  present  marrellouely 
evangelical  message  as  to  the  value  of  penitence.  "  Ton  may  kill 
and  bang  tor  It,  you  may  rob  or  rape;  the  moment  you  truly  re- 
pent and  set  yourself  to  such  atonement  and  reparation  as  Is  pos- 
sible there  remains  no  barrier  between  you  and  Ood.  ...  If  yon 
but  lift  up  your  bead  for  a  moment  out  of  a  stormy  Cbaos  of  mad- 
ness and  cry  to  blm.  Ood  Is  there,  Ood  will  not  fall  you.  A  con- 
victed criminal,  frankly  penitent,  and  neither  obdurate  nor  abject, 
whatever  the  evil  of  bis  yesterdays,  may  still  die  well  and  bravely 
on  the  gallows  to  the  glory  of  Ood.  He  may  step  straight  from 
that  death  Into  the  Uninortal  being  of  Ood"  (Ood  tbe  Invisible 
King,  pp.  156,  166). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


430  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

personality  who  forgivee  and  erer  lovee,  then  vanishes  also 
the  correlative  faith  and  love  which  are  of  the  easence  of 
Christianity,  bat  which  are  imposBible  save  as  they  reach 
out  to  a  transcendent  God.  We  may  have  confldraice  in 
the  persistence  of  the  processes  of  the  universe,  bnt  such 
confidence  is  not  faith,  for  faith  Is  always  the  reaching 
oat  of  personal  spirit  toward  personal  spirit,  and  is  else 
impossible,  as  love  is  else  impossible. 

One  particular  effect  which  results  from  the  dropping 
of  transcendence  from  the  common  thought  is  the  distrust 
of  providence  and  the  consequent  disase  of  prayer.  If  God 
cannot  be  thought  of  outside  the  chain  of  cause  and  effect, 
then  there  is  no  loving  heart ;  why  sboald  we,  how  can  we, 
pray?  What  hope  for  the  guidance  and  help  of  the  Fa- 
ther's hand  which  used  to  be  called  Providence?  If,  as 
many  are  confident,  by  the  distresses  of  these  fateful,  sor- 
rowful years  many  fearful  or  crushed  souls,  lonely  in  the 
great  auiverse,  have  been  driven  to  the  prayer  of  faith, 
surely  the  intellectual  lesson  will  follow  the  spiritual,  and 
men  will  again  believe  in  the  ear  that  hears  prayer,  the 
eye  that  gaides  bis  child,  the  heart  which  ever  loves  the 
world. 

It  has  already  been  asserted  that  the  facts  of  history 
and  the  phenomena  of  spiritual  experience  properly  inter- 
preted verify  the  truth  of  the  Divine  Transcendence,  Es- 
pecially the  Incarnation  of  the  Son  and  the  indwelling  of 
the  Spirit,  when  properly  interpreted,  substantiate  the 
great  truth  which  we  are  considering.  But  it  is  saddening 
to  note  how  far  and  how  often  these  facts  have  been  im- 
properly interpreted.  In  the  almost  passionate  ^deavor 
to  make  immanence  the  master  key  which  should  turn 
every  lock  in  the  universe,  the  Incarnation  of  the  Logos 
and  the  abiding  presence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  the  soul 
of  the  believer  have  both  been  reduced  to  the  type  and 
measnre  of  the  universal  immanence  of  God  in  man.^    As 

'  Even  Pl&tt,  who  In  hlB  book  on  Immanence  ahowB  much  of  the 
boneymoon  ardor  of  a  man  who  baa  lately  wedded  an  Idea,  Baj'i 
of  CbrlBt:    "He  atanda  In  a  category  by  Hlmaelf.    Immanmce  In 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1010]  The  Divine  Trangcendence  131 

Illingworth  well  Bays :  "  The  creed  of  the  Church  is  utterly 
and  wholly  incompatible  with  aaj  approach  to  the  notion 
that  JefiUB  Christ  revealed  the  latent  divinity  of  man ;  in 
the  sense  that  He  exhibits  in  Himself  what  men  poten- 
tially are  and  may  therefore  actually  become." '  It  must 
be  added  that  the  parallel  view  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
indwelling  ot  the  Holy  Spirit  is  equally  removed  from  the 
consentient,  essential,  and  vital  faith  of  the  Church  Uni- 
versal. 

It  is  not  neceesary  to  expatiate  on  the  serioosness  of  the 
consequences  for  theology  of  such  views  as  have  just  been 
meotioned:  theology  is  a  science,  and  as  such  cau  and 
must  take  care  of  itself,  and  theological  error  is  only  in- 
directly a  vital  matter.  But  it  must  be  remarked  that  for 
religion  the  consequences  of  these  views  are  serions  almost 
beyond  measure.  It  is  certainly  to  be  feared  that  many 
a  man  who  claims  to  bring  the  Christian  message  to  men, 
has  of  late  been  finding  lees  of  God  outside  the  meshes  of 
his  universe  of  physical  law,  and  so  less  of  hope  and 
strength  for  himself  and  his  hearers,  than  has  Mr.  Wells 
in  his  message  of  "  The  Invisible  King,"  defective  as  we 
must  recognize  that  that  is.  The  message  which  will  trans- 
form the  world  cannot  be  merely  the  recognition  of  pro- 
gressive evolution,  even  though  we  see  there  the  constant, 
intelligent  power  of  the  immanent  Deity.  The  theologian 
Prank  built  his  theology  largely  on  the  experience  of  re- 
generation, saying,  "  The  Christian  .  .  .  who  has  expe- 
rienced regeneration,  and  appropriated  it  in  conversion,  is 
absolutely  and  without  exception  conscious  of  the  fact 
that  it  is  the  opposite  of  natural  development " '  ;  and  on 

Him  wax  unlQue";  and  alao  Bars  elaewliere:  "The  Immanence  of 
Ood  as  Btated  In  the  Christian  Doctrine  of  the  Holy  Spirit  Is 
nnlqne"  (Immanence  and  Christian  Tbongbt,  pp.  370,  4E2).  It  so, 
It  Is  certainly  most  unfortunate  that  he  and  so  many  others  should 
classify  these  unique  facts  with  others  confessedly  unlike,  under 
the  comjnon  categorr  of  Immanence. 

'  Divine  Transcendence,  p.  74. 

'System  of  Christian  Certainty  (Eng.  tr.),  pp.  307,  308. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


432  BibUotheioa  Sacra  [Oct. 

this  aa  a  premise  he  builds  np  his  argament  for  the  tran- 
scendent and  absolute  Qod.  The  preacher  mnst  bring  the 
same  message  as  to  forgiveness,  redemption,  holiness,  and 
service  to  be  onrs,  the  foreknowledge  of  the  Father,  tlie 
sprinkling  of  the  blood  of  the  Son,  the  sanctification  of  the 
Spirit.  If  we  would  measure  the  divine  power  for  relig- 
ious uses,  its  measure  will  not  be  found  in  the  might  that 
moves  the  stars  along,  but  in  the  working  of  the  strength 
of  his  might  which  he  wrought  in  Christ  when  he  raised 
him  from  the  dead  and  made  him  to  sit  at  his  right  hand, 
in  a  word,  when  the  transcendent  Qod  took  a  dead  man 
and  set  him  on  the  throne  of  the  universe.  If  we  want 
hope,  we  shall  find  it  in  the  assurance  that  by  the  power 
of  the  Spirit  we  shall  l>e  conformed  to  the  image  of  his 
Sod.  In  tbe  dimming  of  the  conception  of  the  Divine 
Transcendence,  these  great  conceptions,  and  others  as  well, 
have  also  been  too  much  darkened:  when  retrimmed  it 
shall  again  shine  forth,  then  the;  too  may  shine  again  tor 
the  enlightenment  of  the  world. 

But  a  single  thought  further  will  be  added.  Lately  we 
have  heard  little  of  the  "  Beatific  Vision  "  and  of  all  that 
this  phrase  suggests.  Men,  even  Christian  teachers,  have 
scoffed  at  every  aspiration  beyond  what  this  world  might 
be  made  to  satisfy.  Perhaps  now  that  we  have  learned  that 
the  world  is  stm  rety  evil,  even  if  we  do  not  go  on  to  add 
that  "  The  times  are  waxing  late,"  men  may  learn  that  the 
soul  has  aspirations  and  needs  that  even  a  world  made 
fit  for  democracy  cannot  satisfy ;  and  they  may  think  again 
the  otherworldly  thoughts  that  of  late  have  been  but  a 
mocking,  and  will  be  glad  again  to  sing^ 

"There  grief  is  turned  to  plettsore — 

Sncb  pleuiure  as  below 
No  human  volc«  may  utter. 

No  human  heart  can  know. 
And  after  fleehly  acandal. 

And  after  this  world's  nlgjit. 
And  after  storm  and  whirlwind, 

Is  Joy  and  calm  and  hgtiL" 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Divine  Transcendence  133 

Tea,  all  this  and  more.  Beyond  every  other  promise  and 
every  otlier  hope  is  one  wtiicb  we  can  hold  only  as  we  think 
of  onr  Lord  as  divinely  transcendent;  and  this  promise 
and  this  hope  beyond  every  other  is  that  "  we  shall  be  like 
him ;  for  we  shall  see  him  as  he  is," — and 

"Amidst  the  bappr  chonu, 
A  place,  bowerer  low, 
Sball  sbow  Him  ub,  and  shewing 
Shall  satiate  evermo." 

Where  in  all  the  history  of  troth  has  there  ever  been  a 
more  perfect  exemplification  of  the  old  apologue  of  the 
shield,  on  one  side  silver,  on  the  other  gold?  Men  have 
wrangled  because  they  saw  bat  one  side  of  the  tmth.  Qod 
is  both  immanent  and  transcendent,  "  One  Ood  and  Father 
of  all,  who  is  over  all,  and  throngh  all,  and  in  alL" 


D.qit.zea'ovGoOt^lc 


THE  PHILOSOPHY  OF  PROHIBITION 

CHABLES    W.    SUFBR 
ATHSNS,     OHIO 

Hb  who  writes  a  history  of  the  clTilization  of  the  nine- 
teenth century  will  hare  to  deal  with  three  movements  of 
primary  importance.  These  movements  are  the  cmsade 
against  slavery,  the  agitation  for  the  enfrancbisement  of 
women,  and  the  campaign  in  favor  of  total  abstinence 
(usually  but  erroneously  called  temperance).  The  first 
was  virtually  brought  to  a  close  by  the  issuance  of  the 
Emancipation  Proclamation  on  January  1,  1863,  by  Presi- 
dent Lincoln,  although  slavery  was  not  entirely  abolished 
until  about  the  beginning  of  the  twentieth  century.  The 
first  Woman's  Bight  Convention  met  at  Seneca  Falls,  New 
York,  in  1848.  Two  years  later  ao  organization  was 
formed  to  promote  the  equality  of  the  sexes  in  the  right 
to  vote  and  to  hold  office.  The  Quakers  were  the  first  to 
affirm  the  parity  of  women  with  men;  but  in  matters  of 
religion  only.  For  a  long  time  total  abstinence  was  advo- 
cated by  what  may  be  called  inhibition;  but  after  it  had 
been  demonstrated  that  voluntary  abstinence  fails  to  pro- 
duce satisfactory  results,  and  the  total  abstainers  had 
become  conscious  of  their  numerical  strength,  tbey  became 
prohibitionists.  These  three  movements  presented  a 
curious  commingling  of  appeals  to  the  emotions,  to  the  love 
of  gain,  and  to  the  reason.  At  present  we  are,  however, 
concerned  with  prohibition  only.  Althou^^  the  Prohi- 
bition party  has  always  maintained  a  friendly  attitude 
toward  woman  suffrage,  recent  experience  has  proved  that 
there  is  no  "  elective  affinity  "  between  the  two.  Entire 
states,  to  say  nothing  of  municipalities,  have  voted  dry  in 
which  women  were  without  the  franchise,  and  vice  veraa. 

The  Prohibition  party  dates  its  origin  from  a  convention 
that  met  in  Chicago  in  1869,  at  which  about  five  hundred 
delegates  were  present.    This  coDveotioo  was  followed  by 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


The  Philosophy  of  Prohibition  435 

another,  beld  in  Colombas,  Obio,  in  1872,  where  Presi- 
dential candidates  were  nominated.  Whether  we  agree  or 
disagree  with  those  who  attended  these  conventions ; 
whether  we  commend  or  condemn  their  motives  we  can 
hardly  withhold  oar  admiration  from  the  zeal  with  which 
the;  pnrsned  their  self-appointed  object.  Many  of  them 
came  long  distances  and  at  no  little  expense,  without  the 
indncements  that  osually  bring  men  together  to  promote 
the  canae  of  a  party.  It  may  be  stated  as  a  general  fact 
tliat  the  devotees  of  prohibition  have  from  the  first  been 
inspired  with  a  spirit  of  self-denial  which  made  their  cause 
partake  somewhat  of  the  character  of  a  religions  crusade. 
The  Prohibition  party  claims,  that,  notwithstanding  its 
poor  showing  at  the  polls,  it  was  the  first  to  embody  in  its 
platform  many  principles  that  were  afterwards  adopted 
and  put  in  practice  by  the  larger  parties.  Among  these 
were  nniversal  suffrage,  civil  service  reform,  direct  elec- 
tions, international  arbitration,  an  income  tax.  Federal 
prohibition  of  child  labor,  conservation  of  natural  re- 
sources, and  others.  The  fundamental  principle  of  the 
party  did  not,  however,  find  general  acceptance  for  many 
years,  and  in  1907  only  three  States  had  adopted  Constitu- 
tional prohibition. 

Since  that  time,  however,  it  may  be  said  to  have  moved 
forward  with  giant  strides.  Enthusiastic  devotees  of  pro- 
hibition are  even  venturing  the  prediction  that  the  time 
will  come,  and  come  at  no  very  distant  date,  when  men 
will  look  back  upon  the  ages  in  which  the  right  to  drink 
was  unquestioned  with  as  much  amazement  as  the  present 
generation  looks  back  upon  the  time  when  the  right  to  h61d 
slaves  was  virtually  unchallenged.  Demosthenes  was  stig- 
matized as  a  "  water  drinker  "  by  some  of  his  contempo- 
raries, which  may  be  taken  as  evidence  that  even  in  the 
ages  long  gone  by  there  were  men  of  prominence  who  prac- 
ticed total  abstinence.  This  epithet  was,  of  course,  used 
by  his  enemies  to  disparage  him.  It  has  often  be^i 
affirmed,  since  the  time  of  the  great  Athenian,  that  one  can- 
not be  a  "  real  good  fallow  "  unless  he  drinks  and  treats. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


436  Baiiotheoa  Sacra  [Oct. 

Men  still  living  can  recall  when  some  members  of  oar 
Federal  Gongrefle  thought  they  could  not  do  their  beet 
unless  they  bad  freely  imbibed  a  stimulant  in  advance,  and 
had  the  source  of  their  inspiration  within  easy  reach  when 
on  their  feet.  Not  only  the  medieval  church,  but  Protes- 
tantism, was  the  enemy  of  drunkenness,  little  as  the  clei^ 
were  able  to  do  towards  preventing  it.  They  made  the 
mistake  of  believing  that  the  drinker  should  be  competent 
to  decide  for  himself  how  much  he  could  imbibe  witboat 
detriment.  It  has  from  time  immemorial  been  a  familiar 
admission  that  "  I  bad  been  drinking,  but  I  was  not  drunk." 
During  all  of  this  time  the  churches,  or  at  least  the  great 
majority  of  nominal  Christians,  had  litUe  to  say  against 
the  unrighteousness  of  slavery. 

The  limits  of  personal  lil>erty  cannot  be  marked  out  ac- 
cording to  any  rational  or  philosophical  principles.  Its 
limits  are  almost  entirely  matters  of  convention  and  com- 
promise. If  we  are  not  justifled  in  saying  that  "  Whatever 
is,  is  right,"  we  are  not  far  from  the  tmth  when  we  afflrm 
that  Whatever  is,  is  expedient.  Albeit,  where  the  majority 
rules,  the  thing  that  is  expedient  this  year  does  not  neces- 
sarily mean  that  it  will  l>e  regarded  as  expedient  next  year 
or  a  century  hence.  Herbert  Spencer,  staunch  individual- 
ist as  he  was,  foresaw  and  foretold  the  "  coming  slavery " 
implicit  in  the  constantly  growing  restrictions  which  the 
community  as  a  whole  imposes  on  each  individual.  These 
restrictions  vary  somewhat  according  to  local  conditions, 
but  the  trend  is  in  the  same  direction  everywhere.  Com- 
paring the  country  with  the  village,  the  village  with  the 
city,  the  average  city  with  the  metropolis,  we  can  observe 
in  its  practical  workings  the  irresistible  encroachments  of 
the  whole  upon  its  parts.  The  dweller  in  the  country  is 
pretty  much  his  own  master.  If  he  moves  into  the  village, 
he  finds  himself  restricted  in  some  of  his  former  activities, 
although  tbey  may  be  entirely  innocuous,  except  in  ex- 
tremely rare  cases.  If  be  transfers  his  residence  to  the 
city,  he  encounters  still  more  restrictions.  If  a  majority 
of  his  neighbors  decide  that  they  want  "  public  improve- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Philoaoiaiy  of  Prohibition  437 

meats,"  he  ie  compelled  to  contribate  his  share  to  the  coat 
whether  he  will  or  no,  with  the  alternate  of  forfeiting  his 
property.  The  majority  may  even  take  hia  property  from 
him,  paying  for  it,  not  what  the  owner  thinks  it  is  worth, 
hat  according  to  the  ralne  which  the  majority  pats 
npon  it. 

The  doctrine  that  the  majority,  however  small,  has  the 
political  right  to  impose  its  will  upon  the  minority,  how- 
ever lat^,  is  thoron^y  sound,  if  the  rapidly  growing 
movement  toward  universal  democracy  is  sound.  But  it 
is  an  absurdity  when  a  State  like  Nevada,  with  less  than 
100,000  inhabitants,  has  an  equal  vote  with  New  York,  with 
its  10,000,000.  For  this  irrationality  the  framers  of  our 
Constitution  were,  as  a  whole,  not  responsible.  The  pigmy 
commonwealths  like  Rhode  Island  were  a  constant  source 
of  vexation,  with  their  insistent  demands  to  be  regarded 
and  treated  as  if  they  were  giants.  Albeit,  the  founders  of 
our  Government  could  not  foresee  in  what  direction  and  to 
what  extent  the  Union  would  expand.  Besides,  there  was 
a  greater  probability  that  Nevada  would,  at  no  very  distant 
date,  become  one  of  our  wealthier  States,  than  that  either 
Rhode  Island  or  Delaware  would  attain  such  a  preponder- 
ance. But  even  the  final  adjustment,  which  was  the  out- 
come of  long  and  acrimonioos  debates,  has  vindicated  its 
wisdom  and  has  been  copied  by  other  states.  The  Clerman 
system,  which  gave  one  state  the  preponderance,  proved  to 
be  thoroughly  bad  when  manipulated  by  an  ambitious  and 
unscrupulous  military  hierarchy,  —  a  government  virtually 
under  the  tutelage  of  a  "  divinely  appointed  autocrat."  But 
there  are  factors  in  this  case  that  make  the  inequality  less 
in  reality  than  appears  on  the  surface.  In  some  States 
women  are  allowed  to  vote,  but  not  in  others. 

Moreover,  apart  from  this  fact,  the  population  of  a  State 
cannot  be  estimated  by  the  size  of  its  vote.  In  the  Presi- 
dential election  of  1916,  Florida,  with  a  male  population  of 
almost  400,000,  cast  only  81,000  votes;  Louisiana,  with  a 
male  population  almost  twice  as  large,  cast  only  93,000 
votes;  while  Mississippi,  with  a  male  population  of  over 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


438  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Ctet. 

900,000,  cast  bnt  86,000  votes.  On  the  other  hand,  New 
Hampshire,  whose  male  population  is  not  mach  over 
200,000,  cast  88,000  votes ;  and  Rhode  Island,  with  a  con- 
siderably greater  poptilation,  cast  bnt  88,000  votes.  Theae 
facts  signify  that  in  some  of  oar  Btates  one  vote  represents 
more  than  three  times  as  many  voters  as  in  others.  In  this 
conntry,  pocket  boroughs  differ  more  from  each  other  by 
their  color  than  by  their  siz«.  Political  divisions,  except 
Then  founded  on  race,  are  always  more  or  less  artificiaL 
If  they  were  based  on  rational  groands,  many  of  them 
woold  have  to  be  changed  every  few  years.  A  small  boy 
and  a  large  one  can  play  on  a  teeter-board  If  the  folcmm 
is  placed  nearer  the  latter.  Bat  the  same  arrangement  wiU 
not  answer  as  the  latter  becomes  heavier.  All  governments 
are  teeter-boards;  and  fortunate  are  those  who  live  nnder 
them  if  they  are  endowed  with  sntBci^it  patriotism  to 
shift  their  positions  withont  bloodshed. 

The  doctrine  that  a  bare  majority  of  voters  may  impose 
their  will  npon  the  minority  is  a  coroUary  of  the  doctrine, 
that  all  men,  or  at  least  all  citizens,  are  equal  before  the 
law.  It  rests  upon  the  absurd  assumption  that  a  majority, 
in  other  words  a  democracy,  is,  nnder  all  circumstances, 
the  best  judge  of  its  own  interests.  The  student  of  govern- 
ment is  often  impressed  with  the  inde&niteness  of  political 
terms.  An  aristocracy  ought  to  be  the  best  government, 
for  the  reason  that  it  is  the  government  of  the  beat.  As 
nobility  and  aristocracy  are  interchangeable  terms,  and  as 
the  nobility  is  presumably  composed  of  noblemen,  who  are 
also  supposed  to  be  noble  men,  we  arrive  at  the  same  con- 
clusion. Moreover,  wtiat  do  men  mean  when  they  apply 
the  predicate  "best"  to  government?  The  Mexicans  seem 
to  be  satisfied  with  their  present  government;  at  any  rate, 
the  majority  are  making  very  little  effort  to  change  it. 

Our  entire  governmental  machinery  is  operated  on  the 
principle  that  the  majority  shall  rale.  A  decision  of  a 
supreme  court  when  rendered  by  five  judges  against  four 
has  the  same  validity  with  one  that  is  unanimous.  Most 
of  our  higher  courts  are  composed  of  an  uneven  number  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Philosophy  of  Prohibition  439 

JQdgee,  becaase  «xperieDce  has  BbowD  that  if  0DI7  anan- 
imona  decisiooB  were  valid,  the  nnmber  would  be  exceed- 
ingly emalt.  Napoleon  once  said  to  a  bench  of  judges, 
"  It  does  not  make  bo  much  difference  how  yon  decide  as 
that  you  decide."  The  last  stronghold  of  legal  unanimity, 
the  traverse  jury,  has  been  compelled  to  surrender  to  a 
majority,  greater  or  less  according  to  the  nature  of  the  case 
upon  which  they  Bit.  In  the  perennial  struggle  between 
the  different  groups  constituting  the  Great  Society,  for 
what  some  consider  their  rights,  but  which  others  refuse 
to  consider  as  euch,  there  is  probably  a  slow  but  gradual 
improvement  so  long  as  the  strife  does  not  degenerate  into 
bloodshed.    But 

"moFA  than  common  Btrengtb  and  aklU  < 

Must  j6  dlsplor  " 

It  70U  would  give  the  better  wlU 
It«  lawful  oway.** 

It  IB  everywhere  assnmed,  and  has  been  taken  for 
granted  from  time  immemorial,  that  the  father  is  the 
natural  protector  of  his  offspring.  This  assumption  ia 
founded  on  the  fact  that  he  is  in  a  more  favorable  position 
than  anybody  else  to  know  and  to  do  what  is  best,  and  that 
he  will  make  a  judicious  use  of  bis  knowledge.  The  ancient 
Soman  patria  poteataa  was  based  on  this  idea.  Albeit,  the 
more  civilized  a  people  becomes,  i.e.  the  larger  the  fund  of 
experience  it  has  accumulated,  the  less  it  is  disposed  to 
accept  this  postulate.  The  law-making  power,  whether  the 
collective  will  of  a  people  or  not,  no  longer  trusts  the 
father  to  make  use  of  his  individual  judgment  in  this 
matter,  but  decides  for  him,  within  certain  limits,  what 
course  he  shall  pursue.  Tbe  law  not  only  compels  him  to 
send  his  children  to  school,  bnt  even  marks  out  a  curricu- 
lum for  them.  If  in  the  popular  judgment  either  the 
father  or  the  mother  is  found  to  be  incompetent  to  take 
proper  care  of  the  children,  they  are  removed  and  placed 
under  competent  tutelage.  This  is  a  far  more  serious  in- 
fringement upon  personal  liberty  than  is  the  annihilation 
of  the  drink  traffic.  Even  after  young  people  have  ceased 
Vol.  tXXVL    No.  ZOi.    t 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


440  BiJ>liotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

to  be  children,  they  are  anbjected  to  laws  in  the  enforcement 
of  which  neither  they  nor  their  parents,  even  if  living,  are 
consulted.  They  are  required  to  attend  school,  in  order 
that  they  may  acquire  additional  knovledge  or  skill  tot 
future  service  of  vhich  the  community  is  the  chief  bene- 
ficiary. It  is  almost  literally  true  that  we  live  amid  the 
snares  and  pitfalls  of  the  law,  according  to  a  dictum  of 
Sir  Henry  Hallam. 

But  the  world  has  learned,  by  dearly  bought  experiokce, 
that  it  is  far  bett^  to  be  governed  by  laws  than  by  decrees. 
As  the  laws  define  acts  that  are  illegal,  and  therefore  pun- 
ishable, those  who  live  under  them  are  always  in  position 
to  know  bow  to  regulate  their  conduct,  in  order  to  avoid 
its  penalties.  On  the  other  hand,  a  mere  decree  may  be 
made  retroactive  and  impose  a  penalty  on  an  act  that  was 
legal  when  it  was  done.  Abstractly  considered,  no  task 
would  appear  to  be  easier  to  perform  than  to  establish  a 
stable  and  even  permanent  government.  As  the  end  of  all 
government  is  to  make  life  and  property  secure,  it  would 
seem  that  a  company  of  reasonable  men  could  frame  a  con- 
stitution that  would  secure  these  ends  with  hardly  a  dis- 
senting voice.  Unfortunately  there  are  now,  as  there  have 
always  been,  men  who  are  reasonable  only  in  their  own 
estimation.  Most  people  have  heard  the  anecdote  of  the 
juryman,  who,  after  holding  out  three  days  against  the 
other  eleven,  thus  preventing  a  verdict,  declared  that  his 
associates  were  eleven  of  the  stubbomest  and  most  unrea- 
sonable men  in  the  conntty.  A  not  inconsiderable  portion 
of  the  citizens  of  every  community  do  not  particularly  care 
whether  any  life  and  property  are  secure  except  their  own, 
but  they  want  other  people  to  pay  for  this  security. 

An  enormous  amount  of  nonsense  has  been  written  and 
spoken  in  the  discussion  of  political  problems.  For  ex- 
ample, we  read  and  hear  a  great  deal  about  "  right "  and 
"  rights,"  as  if  the  meaning  of  these  terms  were  self-evi- 
dent. In  tact,  they  are  nothing  of  the  kind.  "  The  right  to 
cast  a  vote  "  la  a  great  absurdity.  So  man  has  a  natural 
r^t  to  cast  a  vote.    What  is  usually  spoken  of  as  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  PhOoaophjf  of  ProMhition  441 

ri^t  to  vote  la  no  right  at  all,  bat  a  mere  privil^e  accorded 
b;  lav.  Why  U  it  right  tor  a  man  aged  twenty-one  years 
to  vote,  bat  not  if  he  lacks  one  day  of  having  attained  thiB 
age?  And  vhile  men  may  agree  tliat  a  woman  has  as  good 
a  ri^t  to  vote  as  a  man  lias  or  to  participate  in  the  govern- 
ment in  any  way  she  desires,  the  same  government  which 
grants  to  her  these  privileges  may  also  withhold  them. 
We  are  not  here  dealing  with  a  qaestion  of  right  and  wrong 
at  all,  bat  solely  of  expediency.  If  the  woman  aoffragists, 
therefore,  insist  that  the  gentler  sex  —  tell  it  not  in  Wash- 
ington —  has  as  mach  right  to  cast  a  votte  as  a  man  has,  they 
are  on  t)enable  grounds.  Bnt  the  case  is  different  when 
they  contend  for  the  privilege  on  the  assimiption  of  a  nat- 
ural right.  A  good  deal  of  breath  has  been  expended,  and 
ink  wasted,  to  prove  that  yoa  "  can't  make  men  moral  by 
law."  No  man  of  sense  afQrms  that  you  can,  nor  does  any- 
body advocate  prohibition  laws  for  the  purpose  of  making 
men  moral.  Laws  are  not  passed  to  make  men  moral,  but 
to  make  them  orderly.  It  is  a  question  whether  there  is 
such  a  thing  as  a  natural  crime.  A  crime  is  usually  defined 
as  "  an  act  or  omission  which  the  law  punishes  in  the  name 
or  on  behalf  of  the  state,  whether  because  expressly  forbid- 
den or  because  so  injurious  to  the  public  as  to  require  pun- 
ishment on  grounds  of  public  policy."  Criminality  is  a 
matter  of  law,  not  of  nature.  Hence  many  acts  are  made 
crimes  under  one  government  which  are  not  so  under 
another.  On  the  other  hand,  the  morality  of  an  act  de- 
pends upon  the  will,  not  on  the  deed.  If  I  say  that  I  would 
kill  John  Doe  if  it  were  not  for  the  law  against  murder, 
although  I  am  committing  a  moral  wrong,  I  am  not  com- 
mitting a  crime.  If,  on  the  other  hand,  I  make  threats 
against  the  life  of  John  Doe,  I  am  laying  myself  liable  to  a 
penalty  and  may  be  bound  over  to  keep  the  peace.  Hardly 
any  one  will  deny  a  man's  right  to  drink  whatever  and 
whenever  he  pleases,  provided  his  beverage  carries  with  it 
no  actual  or  potential  injury  to  others ;  bnt  when  the  argu- 
ment is  shifted  to  the  ground  that  the  community  may  de- 
cide that  it  is  expedient  to  prohibit  entirely  the  drinking  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


412  Bibliotheoa  Sacra  [Oct. 

all  iotoxicating  liquors,  it  resta  oo  logical  gronndB,  the 
Bame  grounds  on  which  all  pure  food  lavs  rest.  Some 
adnlterauts  are  admittedly  harmless,  yet  their  sale  is 
almost  everywhere  forbidden  under  penalty.  Constitn- 
tions,  whether  written  or  merely  traditional,  if  they  are  to 
be  abiding,  must  grow;  they  cannot  be  made  to  order  or 
constructed  according  to  any  preconceived  ideas  of  what 
such  documents  ought  to  be.  An  oyster  shell  is  not  an 
agreeable  object  to  the  eye  nor  pleasant  to  the  touch ;  but 
it  is  exactly  snited  to  the  creature  that  inhabits  it,  and  is 
doubtless  built  in  full  accord  with  the  established  prin- 
ciples of  oatrean  esthetics.  We  may  venture  the  same 
afQrmation  of  governments:  none  of  those  that  have  long 
perdured  have  been  constructed  in  accordance  with  the 
principles  laid  down  by  the  architects  of  Utopias.  Most  of 
those  still  in  existence  have  been  built  up  from  within,  like 
the  shell  of  the  oyster,  and  almoat  aa  uuconscioosly.  It  is 
a  question  whether  an;  government  has  been  subverted  by 
attacks  from  without.  Most  of  those  that  have  fallen,  if 
not  all,  were  weeikened  by  internal  strife  to  such  an  extent 
that  snccesBful  resistance  against  foreign  enemies  waa  im- 
possible. 

The  people  called  Methodists  were  the  first  to  make 
virtual  total  abstinence  a  part  of  tbeir  creed.  About  1740, 
when  John  Wesley  formulated  a  set  of  rules  for  the  govern- 
ment of  his  members,  he  placed  among  them  one  in  which 
he  declares  that  it  is  expected  of  all  who  wish  to  continue 
in  these  societies  to  abstain  from  "  drunkenness,  buying 
and  selling  spiritnoos  liquors  or  drinking  them  except  in 
cases  of  extreme  necessity."  It  is  true  he  also  forbade 
"  slave-holding,  buying  or  selling  slaves  " ;  yet  the  Methodist 
Church,  Sonth,  upheld  slavery,  and  brought  about  a  schism 
a  little  more  than  a  century  after  Mr.  Wesley  began  to  form 
his  societies.  Thia  schism  was  mainly  due  to  the  generally 
admitted  racial  inferiority  of  the  blacks,  and  had  no  in- 
fluence on  the  attitude  of  the  Church  toward  the  con- 
sumption of  ardent  spirits.  Thia  Church  is  recognised  by 
the  liquor  trafSc  aa  its  most  formidable  antagonist ;  and  its 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  PhUoaophy  of  ProhiUtwn  443 

members  have  never  ehown  a  dispositioD  to  deny  the  im- 
peachment. When  it  was  first  organized  in  this  country, 
abont  1784,  the  following  entry  was  made  a  part  of  its 
minntes : — 

"  Question.  Should  our  Friends  be  permitted  to  make 
spirituous  liquors  and  to  drink  them  in  drams? 

"  Answer.  By  no  means." 
Since  1812  the  attitude  of  this  Church  has  been  increas- 
ingly radical.  At  a  meeting  of  the  National  Liquor 
Dealers'  Association  in  1911,  one  of  the  speakers  uttered 
the  bitterest  denunciations  against  this  "  fanatical,  aggres- 
sive, and  sometimes  unscrupulous  force  [the  Methodist 
Church]  which  is  leading  the  movement  for  political 
supremacy  under  the  guise  of  temperance  reform."  In  the 
same  year  the  brewers,  who  had  met  in  New  Orleans,  gave 
utterance  to  similar  sentiments;  and  a  few  months  later 
Bonfort'sWww  and  Spirit  Circular  asserted  that  "  we  must 
realize  that  the  entire  Methodist  Church  is  a  solidified,  ag- 
gressive and  obedient  unit  in  this  warfare  on  our  trade." 
While  it  may  be  true  that  the  churches  classed  under  the 
generic  name  of  Methodist  are  the  most  powerful  enemy 
of  the  liquor  traffic,  tiecause  of  the  number  of  their  adher- 
ents, they  are  not  more  radical  than  the  Presbyterians. 
We  have  here  a  typical  exhibition  of  the  fatuity  that  has 
for  decades  misled  the  whole  opposition  to  the  temperance 
movement.  No  church,  certainly  no  Protestant  church, 
has  the  slightrat  intention  of  trying  to  gain  control  of  the 
Oovemment.  No  single  church  in  this  country  is  strong 
enough  to  accomplish  such  an  end,  even  if  a  few  leaders 
desired  it.  Besides,  the  doctrine  that  church  and  state 
should  be  kept  separate  is  so  generally  accepted  in  this 
country,  that  it  cannot  be  uprooted  within  measurable 
time.  This  doctrine  has,  furthermore,  been  gaining  ad- 
herents rapidly  in  all  nominally  Christian  lands. 

The  well-known,  and  at  one  time  the  much-read,  Henry 
Thomas  Buckle,  seems  to  have  foreseen,  more  than  fifty 
years  ago,  the  potency  of  the  force  which  Mr.  Wesley  set  in 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


444  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

motion.    Althoogh  be  bad  no  sympathy  with  its  under- 
lying religions  motivea,  he  wrote : — 

"  Under  two  of  the  most  remarkable  men  of  the  eighteenth 
century,  White&eid  the  first  of  theological  orators,  and 
Wesley  the  first  of  theological  statesmen,  there  was  organ- 
ised a  great  e^stem  of  religion  which  bore  the  same  rela- 
tion to  the  Church  of  England  that  the  Church  of  England 
bore  to  the  Chnrch  of  Rome.  Thus  after  an  interval  of  two 
hundred  years,  a  second  spiritual  reformation  was  effected 
in  our  country.  In  the  eighteenth  century  the  Wesleyana 
were  to  the  bishops  what,  in  the  sixteenth  century,  the 
Reformers  were  to  the  Popes." 
And  again: — 

"  The  Weeleys  displayed  a  genius  for  organization  so 
superior  to  that  of  their  predecessors,  the  Puritans,  that 
th^  soon  became  a  center  round  which  the  enemies  of  the 
church  could  conveniently  rally.  And  what  is  perhaps 
still  more  important,  the  order,  regularity  and  publicity 
by  which  their  proceedings  have  been  marked,  distingui^ 
them  from  all  other  sects,  and  by  raising  them,  as  it  were, 
to  the  dignity  of  a  rival  establishment,  have  encouraged  the 
diminution  of  that  exclusive  and  superstitions  respect 
which  was  once  paid  to  the  Anglican  hierarchy." 

Whether  it  be  true  or  untrue,  as  often  charged,  that  Eng- 
lish bishops  are  the  chief  supporters  of  the  liquor  trade  in 
Great  Britain,  there  is  no  doubt  that  several  of  them  are 
financially  interested.'  Early  in  the  war  the  story  was 
told,  that,  when  at  a  public  banquet  the  King  turned  down 
his  wineglass  as  an  example,  several  bishops  refused  to  do 
likewise.  This  incident  is  instructive  as  showing  the  de- 
termination of  the  typical  Briton  to  assert  what  he  con- 
siders his  right,  whether  royalty  agrees  or  disagrees. 

Methodism  was  a  revival,  rather  than  a  reformation  in 
the  usual  acceptation  of  the  term :  at  any  rate,  it  was  in 
no  aeaBB  a  religious  revolution.  Its  purpose  was  not  to 
destroy  anything,  but  to  build  upon  foundations  already 
'  Not  many  years  ago  a  cartoon  appeared  In  the  WeatintiiBter  Qa- 
lette,  representing  a  prince  bishop  supported  on  one  side  by  an 
Inane-Iooblng  pea-  and  on  the  other  by  a  booEy-looUos  pnbticao. 
ttndemeatli  was  the  Inscription,  "Untt«d  we  stand;  divided  we 
fiUl." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Phiiosoiai^  of  Prohibition  445 

laid.  Hence  it  contributted  greatly  toward  raising  the 
moral  tone  of  the  claaa  that  was  most  susceptible  to  per- 
snasioD.  It  called  for  no  change  of  creed,  bnt  merely  a 
change  of  condact.  Stress  is  laid  npoo  this  fact  by  all 
recent  English  historians.  J.  B.  Green,  in  language  al- 
most identical  with  that  of  Canon  Farrar,  writes  of  Wes- 
ley: "  He  recreated  England.  But  for  the  new  life  created 
by  the  Wealeyan  revival,  Pitt  never  could  have  come  iuto 
power,  as  there  would  have  been  nothing  on  which  be  could 
stand."  Mr.  Wesley's  most  ardent  admirers  never  used 
stronger  language  than  this.  Although  somewhat  super- 
stltioua,  he  was  an  avowed  enemy  of  mysticism  in  every 
form,  and  steadfastly  directed  his  energies  towards  the 
attainment  of  practical  ends.  If  we  wish  to  render  a 
verdict  upon  his  mentality  in  its  briefest  form,  we  can 
hardly  do  better  than  to  say  that  he  was  a  representative 
Englishman.  Perhaps  for  this  very  reason  he  never  met 
with  much  success  in  Scotland.  Goldwin  Smith,  in  his 
"  United  Kingdom,"  writes  of  nonconformity  in  general : 
"  Its  annals  are  not  poetic  nor  picturesque ;  but  for  it,  Eng- 
land might  have  been  an  Anglican  Spain,  if  the  Noncon- 
formist had  not  been  there."  Its  strength  lay  in  the  middle 
class,  whose  members  lacked  culture  because  tbey  were  ex- 
cluded from  the  universities;  but  they  were  niot  ignorant, 
nor  devoid  of  a  certain  shrewdness  and  moral  insight  into 
the  needs  of  the  times  and  the  necessities  of  supplying  them 
so  far  as  lay  in  their  power. 

The  mass  movement  in  favor  of  total  abstinence,  which 
was  later  overslaughed  by  the  demand  for  the  total  de- 
struction of  the  liquor  traffic  by  law,  originated  among  the 
Anglo-Saxons,  although  it  has  made  more  rapid  progress 
in  the  former  and  present  British  possessions  than  in  the 
homeland.  This  fact  is  not  surprising  when  we  consider 
that  the  liquor  traffic  had  become  so  thoroughly  intrenched 
on  the  British  Isles  by  centuries  of  privilege,  and  so  much 
money  had  been  invested  therein,  that  it  was  extremely  diffi- 
cult to  eradicate  it  It  is  an  interesting  fact,  and  one  that 
is  of  far  wider  significance  than  most  people  suspect,  that 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


416  Bihliotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

the  opposition  to  the  use  of  ardent  spirits  originated  in  the 
emotions,  and  not  in  the  reason.  As  late  as  the  end  of  the 
eighteenth  centQry,  no  man  of  science  donbted  the  efScacy 
of  alcohol  as  a  cnrative  agent  in  disease  or  as  a  prophy- 
lactic against  almost  all  human  ills.  Ardent  spirits  were 
freely  prescribed  by  physicians  and  constantly  used  in  the 
preparation  of  their  medicaments.  Dr.  Benjamin  Bush 
was  the  first  man  of  eminence  who  dared  to  lay  siege  to 
this  almost  universal  faith,  in  his  book  "  The  Effecta  of  Ar- 
dent Spirits  on  the  Human  Mind  and  Body."  The  work 
may  almost  be  said  to  have  created  a  sensation,  and  it  was 
only  the  eminence  of  the  author  that  saved  it  from  being 
treated  with  ridicule.  It  is  strange,  however,  that  the  dis- 
tinguished author  does  not  seem  to  have  been  aware  of  the 
incojisistency  of  his  position;  for,  while  he  condemned 
distilled  liquors,  he  believed  that  malt  liquors  contain  food 
qualities.  The  injurious  element  in  distilled  liquors  is  also 
present  in  beer,  although  in  smaller  quantities.  Half  a 
dozen  little  devils  may  do  more  harm  than  one  big  devU. 

The  first  total  abstinence  society  in  this  country  is  be- 
lieved to  have  been  organized  by  Dr.  James  Clark  in  1808, 
although  its  members  were  permitted  to  drink  on  tiie  ad- 
vice of  a  physician  or  at  public  dinners.  He  was  probably 
influenced  by  Dr.  Bush's  book.  He  died  at  Olens  Palls, 
New  York,  in  1867,  at  the  age  of  ninety.  In  1812  a  tem- 
perance society  was  also  organized  in  Maine.  Thomas 
Jefferson  was  one  of  the  early  American  advocates  of  tem- 
perance; but  he  also  advocated  the  substitution  of  light 
liquors  for  ardent  spirits.  He  wanted  to  tax  whiskey  out 
of  existence.  He  was  led  to  adopt  this  radical  view  by  the 
trouble  many  of  his  oflSceholders  gave  him  by  their  too  free 
patronage  of  dramshops.  He  declared  that  "  the  habit  of 
using  ardent  spirits  by  men  in  office  has  occasioned  more 
injury  to  the  public,  and  more  vexation  to  me,  than  all  other 
causes.  Were  I  to  commence  my  administration  again,  the 
only  question  I  would  ask  respecting  a  candidate  for  office 
woold  he, '  Does  he  use  ardent  spirits? '  "  When  President 
Jefferson  uttered  this  dictum  he  had  either  forgotten  or 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  PhUoaophy  of  Prohibition  447 

ignored  the  fact  that  he  was  always  more  concerned  to 
place  good  friends  of  his  in  office  than  sober  men.  Several 
temperance  societies  were  organized  during  the  following 
three  or  toar  decades,  one  of  these  among  Congressmen,  of 
which  Lewis  Cass  was  the  first  president.  About  one  tenth 
of  the  Federal  body  were  enrolled.  After  the  Civil  War 
the  Honorable  H.  W.  Blair  was  the  foremost  champion  of 
total  abstinence  in  his  day,  both  in  the  General  Assembly 
of  his  native  State  and  in  Congress.  In  the  latter  body  he 
was  subjected  to  much  ridicule,  and  not  a  little  abuse, 
both  by  his  fellow  members  and  by  the  general  public. 
Nevertheless,  he  could  not  be  diverted  from  his  purpose; 
and,  as  he  is  still  living,  he  doubtless  looks  back  with  not  a 
little  satisfaction  upon  the  triumph  of  a  cause  which  at  one 
time,  and  for  a  long  time,  only  "  cranks  "  advocated.  He 
doubtless  often  thinks  of  the  proverb  "  He  laughs  l)eet  who 
laughs  last." 

The  indictment  so  often  and  so  persistently  brought  by 
the  liquor  forces  against  the  men  who  are  devoting  their 
whole  time  to  the  prohibition  cause,  that  they  are  acting 
solely  from  selfish  motives,  is  so  absurd  as  to  be  positively 
funny.  They  would  have  us  believe,  furthermore,  that  the 
thousands  who  contribute  their  money  voluntarily  to  the 
cause  are  so  gullible  that  a  few  score  of  men  are  able  to 
impose  upon  them  to  such  an  extent  as  to  elicit  from  them 
thousands  of  dollars  to  aid  a  cause  in  which  they  have  no 
interest.  If  those  paid  agents  are  successful  in  making  the 
whole  nation  dry,  they  will  have  destroyed  their  own  busi- 
ness, and  there  will  I>e  nothing  for  them  to  do.  Conse- 
quraitly  they  will  have  to  seek  some  other  occupation. 
The  liquor  interests  would  have  the  public  believe  that,  by 
making  themselves  the  champions  of  personal  liberty  in  this 
one  particular,  they  are  the  only  altruists.  We  do  not  hear 
of  any  individuals  who  have  become  wealthy  throng  pro- 
hibition; while  the  number  of  millionaires  from  the  brew- 
ing and  distilling  interests  is  considerable.  As  long  as 
those  men  have  the  legal  prerogative  to  sell  their  product, 
no  one  should  gainsay  them.    When  they  sell  it  ill^ally, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


118  Bibliotheca  Boon  [Oct. 

the  case  ie  different  It  ma;  be  said  tbat  the  liquor  traffic 
is  the  odI;  bnsinefls  that  is  conducted  quite  as  freely  oat- 
side,  the  lav  as  vithin  it;  (or,  wherever  there  are  licensed 
dramshops,  an  illegal  tradSc  floarishes  with  equal  vigor. 
Perhaps  the  business  cannot  be  reformed ;  at  any  rate,  do 
determined  effort  seems  to  have  been  made.  Time  and 
again  the  liquor  interests  hare  been  told,  by  men  engaged 
in  the  same  business,  that  saloons  are  a  nuisance,  and  tbat 
it  is  their  own  fault.  It  would  seem  that  common  pro- 
dence,  or  what  is  oft^  called  "  horse  sense,"  would  make  it 
plain  to  a  man  who  fomishes  a  commodity  to  the  public 
under  legal  restrictions,  that  it  is  to  his  interest  to  prevent 
another  from  furnishing  the  same  product  without  such  re- 
strictions. Whatever  may  be  said  of  the  wholesale  dealers, 
it  is  notorious  that  saloon  beepers  are,  with  few  exceptions, 
men  who  have  no  repntation  to  forfeit. 

What  is  usually  called  the  temperance  movement  has 
passed  through  stages  or  at  least  into  the  third  stage.  In 
the  first  stage  its  protagonists  demanded  no  more  of  its 
friends  than  voluntary  abstention  from  intoxicating  bev- 
erages. Men  were  urged  to  practice  abstinence  by  the 
strength  of  their  Qwn  will.  They  were  urged  to  signify 
their  intentions  by  joining  with  others  in  an  organization 
that  had  the  same  aim.  This  was  the  status  of  the  case 
tmtil  a  few  decades  ago.  The  Woman's  Christian  Temper- 
ance Union,  usually  called  the  W.  C.  T.  U.,  which  was  or- 
ganized in  1883,  grew  out  of  the  Woman's  Crusade,  that 
began  its  activities  ten  years  earlier  in  Ohio.  The  chief 
purpose  of  its  members  was  to  induce  saloon  keepers  to 
give  np  their  business  and  to  enter  other  vocations,  also 
aiding  them  incidentally  to  do  so.  The  Anti-Saloon  League 
was  organized  at  Oberlin,  Ohio,  in  1893.  Its  avowed 
object,  as  its  title  indicates,  was  virtually  identical  with 
tbat  of  the  organisation  jnst  named,  but  with  a  member- 
ship composed  exclusively  of  men.  It,  however,  undertook 
to  secure  legislation,  and  when  secnred  to  enforce  it.  It 
made  no  war  on  private  drinking,  although  it  frowned  on 
the  drinking  habit.    It  strove  for  the  closing  of  saloons,  in 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  PhUosophy  of  ProhUtition  449 

order  to  remove  temptation  from  those  who  were  too  weak 
to  resist  temptation.  The  League  met  with  considerable 
success  in  the  smaller  commnnities,  and  even  closed  man; 
dramshops  in  the  larger  municipalities.  It  was  discovered 
that  many  men  who  were  by  no  means  averse  to  drinking 
were  glad  to  join  in  a  movement  which  kept  saloons  at  a 
distance  from  their  families.  These  methods  proving  too 
slow  in  their  operation,  the  radical  reformers  began  to 
direct  their  efforts  toward  the  total  extermination  of  the 
dramshops. 

The  rapidity  with  which  the  prohibition  forces  marched 
over  the  final  stretch  into  the  land  where  there  should  be 
neither  beer  nor  distilled  liquors  has  been  almost  marvelous 
when  we  consider  the  long  period  dnring  which  they  were 
engaged  in  marshaling  and  training  their  forces.  It  was  a 
notable  case  of  vires  adquirit  eundo.  It  is  the  final  stage 
of  a  process  of  evolution  effected  almost  entirely  through 
the  enormous  amount  of  literature  placed  before  the  public 
by  friends  of  the  reform.  It  has  kept  pace  with  the  growth 
of  democracy.  It  is  an  error  to  maintain,  as  so  many  of 
its  opponents  are  wont  to  do,  that  a  prohibition  state  is 
unnatural.  Francis  Lieber,  the  eminent  German-Ameri- 
can publicist,  pointed  out  long  ago  that  one  state  of  society 
is  DO  more  natural  than  another;  that  conditions  more  or 
less  artificial  may  be  produced  temporarily  by  force;  but 
that  such  conditions  are  always  transient.  Yet  even  these 
can  hardly  be  called  unnatural.  The  prohibition  move- 
ment was  greatly  aided  by  our  entrance  into  the  World 
War.  But  the  acceleration  was  not  wholly  due  to  solici- 
tude of  those  who  remained  at  home  for  the  welfare  of  the 
soldiers  who  went  abroad :  it  was  largely  owing  to  the  fear 
of  being  charged  with  pro-Oermanism  by  their  fellow  citi- 
zens. For  reasons  both  politic  and  political,  many  men 
voted  for  statutory  prohibition  who  had  no  sympathy  with 
it.  The  German-American  Alliance,  which  had  for  some 
time  been  the  mouthpiece  and  protagonist  of  pro-Oerman- 
ism in  this  country,  had  become  arrogant,  and  its  speakers 
had  indulged  in  disparaging  remarks  upon  almost  every- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


160  Bibliotheca  8acra  [Oct. 

thing  American,  especially  upon  prohibition.  It  had 
entered  upon  the  project  of  forming  an  imperium  in  vm- 
perio,  one  of  the  fundamental  principles  of  which  was  to 
be  the  unchallenged  right  of  every  individual  to  drink  with- 
out other  restraint  than  that  imposed  by  the  individoal 
will.  It  appears  to  have  had  no  more  doubt  of  euccesa  than 
had  the  Kaiser  when  he  launched  his  great  drives,  west- 
ward, eastward,  and  southward. 

In  1910,  a  prominent  journal,  published  in  the  interest 
of  the  liquor  trade,  declared  that  "the  Anglo-Saxon  ele- 
ment from  which  we  inherit  the  abominable  remnants  of 
Puritanism  is  fast  disappearing  from  this  country."  We 
have  here  an  instance  of  incredible  fatuity.  The  prophecy 
was  as  false  as  the  Kaiser's,  that  he  would  soon  mle  the 
entire  world.  Some  years  later  we  were  told,  in  almost 
the  same  words,  that  the  Anglo-Saxon  churches  "  are  the 
hotbeds  of  narrowness  and  fanaticism."  In  a  speech  de- 
livered before  a  large  audience  in  Milwaukee,  Wisconsin, 
Dr.  Hexamer,  the  president  of  the  Alliance,  was  reported 
to  have  used  the  following  intemperate  and  foolish  lan- 
guage:— 

*'  In  order  to  obtain  for  Oerman-Americans  the  place  in 
the  sun  which  was  always  denied  them,  it  is  absolutely 
essential  that  personal  liberty  be  guaranteed  them,  and 
that  it  be  not  curtailed  by  the  attacks  of  nativists  and  pro- 
hibitionists. We  hare  suffered  long  the  preachments  that 
'yon  Oermans  must  allow  yourselves  to  be  assimilated; 
yon  must  merge  in  the  American  people.'  But  no  one 
will  ever  find  us  prepared  to  descend  to  an  inferior  leveL 
Ko!  We  have  made  it  our  aim  to  elevate  others  to  our 
level.  We  will  not  allow  our  two-thousand-year  old  cul- 
ture to  be  trodden  down  in  this  land.  Many  are  giving  our 
Oerman  culture  to  this  land  of  our  children;  but  this  is 
possible  only  if  we  stand  together  and  conquer  this  dark 
spirit  of  muckerdom  and  prohibition,  just  as  Siegfried 
slew  the  dragon.  Let  us  stand  together  for  our  good  right 
and  hold  together.  Be  strong !  Be  strong  and  be 
German" ! 

The  speaker's  reference  to  "  our  two-thousand-year  old 
culture "  is  decidedly  refreshing.    According  to  Tacitus, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Pkiloaophy  of  Prohibition  451 

the  most  conspicoons  characteriBtic  of  the  ancient  Qermans 
was  their  craving  for  etrong  drink.  He  assured  his  coon- 
trymen  that  they  could  conquer  those  barbarians  far  more 
easily  by  gratifying  their  appetite  than  with  the  sword. 
There  is  no  doabt  that  it  was  the  old  culture  which  the 
Germans  tried  to  impose  upon  the  Belgians  and  the  French, 
and,  because  of  their  refusal  to  accept  it,  inflicted  upon 
them  penalties  which  a  dozen  years  ago  were  unthink- 
able—  except,  of  course  by  Qermans.  Now,  however,  its 
quondam  champions  no  longer  defend  it,  and  apparently 
even  the  Germans  have  reached  the  conclusion  that  it  is  not 
the  "  real  thing,"  nor  anything  like  it.  At  any  rate,  they 
no  longer  boast  of  its  peerleseness.  Those  who  were  to 
lead  its  promulgators  to  the  ends  of  the  earth  have  tired 
of  their  job  and  resigned.  What  German  culture  means, 
as  distinguished  from  the  much-vilifled  Anglo-Saxon,  is 
portrayed  by  Brand  Whitlock: — 

"  For  one  of  our  Anglo-Saxon  race  and  legal  traditions, 
to  understand  the  conditions  in  Belgium  during  the  German 
occupation  it  is  necessary  to  banish  resolutely  from  the 
mind  every  conception  of  right  we  have  iuherited  from  our 
ancestors  —  conceptions  that  have  long  since  crystalized 
into  principles  of  law  and  have  been  confirmed  in  our 
charters  of  liberty.  In  the  German  mentality  these  concep* 
tions  do  not  exist;  they  think  in  other  sequences;  they  act 
according  to  other  principles  —  the  conviction  that  there 
is  only  one  rigbt,  one  privilege,  and  that  it  belongs  ex- 
clusively to  the  Germans,  the  conviction,  namely,  that  they 
have  the  right  to  do  whatever  they  have  the  physical  force 
to  do." 

"  Our  good  right,"  just  quoted,  is  a  decidedly  "bad  break," 
The  aforementioned  speaker  assumes  that  a  man  may  take 
with  him  into  a  foreign  country  the  political  privilege  and 
social  usages  to  which  he  had  been  accustomed  in  his  native 
land.  He  forgets,  that,  when  bis  pursuit  of  happiness  in  the 
new  environment  is  not  in  accord  with  that  which  he  left 
behind,  he  must  change  his  opinions,  or  at  least  his  prac- 
tices, if  he  would  avoid  trouble.  This  arrogant  assumption 
is  distinctively  Prussian,  and  not  German,  except  by  trans- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


4B2  BibUotheoa  Sacra  [Oct 

fusion.  One  is  here  roninded  of  tlie  dictmn  of  Ooethe,  that 
the  Prussian  was  alvaye  a  brute,  and  education  will  make 
him  ferocious. 

With  the  record  of  the  Belgian  and  French  tpoope  before 
us,  it  ia  not  eas;  to  find  evidence  that  they  would  hare  dis- 
played greater  bravery  if  they  had  been  total  abstainers. 
Although  they  could  oot  save  Belgium  from  subjugation, 
they  saved  Paris  from  capture  —  a  marvelous  achievement 
under  the  circnmstances.  While  it  is  true  that  most  of 
these  troops  were  accustomed  to  light  wines  only,  the  mere 
fact  that  in  both  Belgium  and  France  there  are  many 
breweries,  and  that  their  output  is  in  the  main  for  home 
consumption,  is  evidence  that  there  is  a  large  demand  (or 
malt  liquors.  When  we  compare  the  British  navy,  now 
comparatively  grc^less,  with  its  predecessors  in  the  times 
when  it  was  taken  as  a  matter  of  course  that  a  seaman 
would  not  fight  unless  he  had  been  liberally  supplied  with 
strong  drink,  there  is  no  difference.  As  it  was  in  the  days 
of  Sir  Richard  Orenville,  when,  with  but  a  single  ship,  he 
refused  to  run  from  a  Spanish  fleet  although  he  knew  that 
"  to  fight  was  but  to  die,"  an  action  which  Tennyson  has 
made  familiar  to  everybody  who  reads  English ;  so  the  gal- 
lant English  seamen  stuck  to  their  posts,  a  few  years  ago, 
though  knowing  full  well  that  the  same  fate  awaited  them. 
When  Admiral  Cradock's  little  fleet  encountered  greatly 
superior  numbers  off  the  coast  of  Chile,  nobody  asked, 
How  many  of  the  enemy  are  there?  but,  Where  is  the 
enemy?  and  all  went  down  together.  It  is,  moreover,  a 
question  whether  it  required  more  courage  to  engage  in  a 
conflict,  that,  in  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  could  last  but 
an  hour  or  two,  than  the  unremitting  vigil  on  the  North 
Sea,  kept  up,  year  after  year,  by  the  Grand  Fleet  On  the 
other  hand,  no  amount  of  "  booze "  could  inspire  the 
Oerman  seamen  with  the  courage  to  "  try  again "  after 
their  experience  off  the  coast  of  Jutland,  although  tlie 
Kaiser  electrified  his  people  with  the  announcemeut  that  a 
glorious  victory  had  been  won  for  them.  Those  who  were 
expected  to  win  another  refused  pointblank  to  make  the 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  PhiloaopKy  of  Prohibition  453 

attempt.  Doriog  the  last  quarter  of  the  nlDeteeDth  centnry, 
and  well  into  the  twentieth,  Oermau  Barants  were  buaii; 
engaged  in  the  search  for  new  inrentions  and  dlBcoveriea; 
but  th^  did  not  sacceed  in  finding  any  food  or  drink  that 
would  make  their  officers  men  of  honor  or  instill  into  their 
soldiers  the  fundamental  principles  of  civilisation.  It 
may  be  that,  in  their  determination  to  be  supermen,  they 
nerer  felt  the  need  of  those  virtues  of  the  olden  time. 

Many  of  the  advocates  of  legal  prohibition  who  believe 
their  doctrines  to  be  supported  by  the  teachings  of  the  Mew 
Testament  misapprehend  its  spirit  The  Letters  were  all 
addressed  to  professing  Christians ;  and  if  their  profession 
was  genuine,  they  had  no  need  of  laws  to  restrain  them 
from  doing  what  might  be  a  stumbling  block  to  others  or 
set  them  a  bad  example.  Very  few  of  them  were  Roman 
citizens,  and  they  had  therefore  no  direct  influence  upon 
the  government  under  which  they  lived.  They  were  ex- 
pected to  pay  taxes  and  ask  no  questions.  It  was  not 
until  the  fourth  century  of  the  Christian  era  that  con- 
ditions began  to  change.  It  was  in  this  spirit  that  St. 
Paul  wrote  that  all  things  were  allowable,  but  not  all 
things  were  expedient,  for  him,  He  did  not  mean  that  all 
should  be  taken  literally,  as  it  might  thus  include  theft, 
murder,  and  other  acts  that  would  be  subversive  of  public 
order.  The  injunction  to  Timothy, "  Do  not  continue  to  drink 
water  only,  but  take  a  little  wine  on  account  of  the  weak- 
ness of  your  stomach  and  your  frequent  ailments,"  would 
be  appropriate  only  if  addressed  to  a  total  abstainer.  Here 
wine  is  recommended  as  a  medicament,  not  as  a  beverage. 
Since  the  sacrament  was  instituted  as  a  memorial  service, 
It  was  certainly  uot  intended  that  the  elements  should  hence- 
forth and  forever  be  the  same  with  those  of  which  Christ 
and  his  friends  partook  on  that  solemn  occasion.  If  the 
example  of  Christ  is  to  be  followed  exactly  in  every  par- 
ticular, the  Last  Supper  would  have  to  be  partaken  of  in 
the  night,  or  at  least  in  the  evening.  (A  few  of  the  minor 
religious  bodies  do  actually  hold  their  communion  services 
in  the  night.)     There  is  a  wide  difference  between  obeying 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


451  BaUotheca  Sacra 

a  principle  and  following  a  custom.  A  fitting  answer  was 
once  given  to  a  literalist  by  John  B.  Oough.  When  he 
was  lecturing  on  temperance,  a  heckler  in  the  audience 
called  out:  "  What  abont  Christ  turning  water  into  wine?  " 
To  this  question  Mr.  GK>ngh  replied :  "  I  have  no  objection 
to  wine  that  is  made  of  water." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


THE  VICTORIOUS  LIFE  (II.) 


THS  BSTERBND  W.  H.  GRIFFITH   THOMAS^  D.D. 
PHILADBU'HIA,  FBNNSYLTANIA 


I  HAVB  now  endeavored  to  comment  on  some  of  Dr.  War- 
field's  statements  and  also  to  express  in  general  the  mean- 
ing of  the  Keswick  Movement.  I  now  proceed  to  call  at- 
tention to  two  witnesses  to  this  position.  The  flret  of  these 
is  the  Bishop  of  Durham,  Dr.  Monle,  whose  saintliness, 
sanctiAed  common  sense,  and  scbolarstiip  none  who  know 
him  will  question.  It  so  tiappenB  that  at  the  Keswick  Oon- 
vention  of  Jul7,  1918,  the  Bishop  spoke  on  the  distinctive 
message  of  the  Convention,  and  discussed,  "  What  Keswick 
stands  tor."  After  pointing  out  its  basis  in  the  Divine  Per- 
son and  Atoning  Work  of  Christ  received  by  faith  for  sal- 
vation, he  went  on  to  say  that 

" '  Keswick '  stands  distinctively  for  this  —  Christ,  oar 
righteousness  upon  Calvary,  received  by  faith,  Christ  our 
holiness  in  the  heart  that  submits  to  Him  and  tttat  relies 
upon  Him,  and  that  uses  Him  (which  we  say  in  brief  in 
the  watchword  '  Holiness  by  faith ')  —  that  is  the  inmost 
distinctiveness  of  the  '  Keswick '  message  upon  one  side. 
It  does  not  for  an  instant  say  that  it  exists  for,  though  it 
stands  upon,  the  preaching  of  the  truth  of  pardon;  bat  it 
does  humbly  say  that  it  stands  as  a  witness  for  the  oft- 
foi^tten,  oft-misunderstood,  oft-misapplied,  but  blessed 
and  living  truth,  '  Holiness  by  faith ' ;  Christ  oar  power 
for  internal  simplicity  and  cleansing,  as  He  is  received,  in 
submissive  trust,  as  the  soul  trusts  Him  and  entrusts  it- 
self to  Him  to  have  His  way,  to  do  His  work,  to  act  the 
very  springs  of  thought  and  wUl  to  put  out  His  blessed, 
loving  power,  fulfilling  the  promise,  '  I  wUl  subdue  their 
iniquities,  I  will  write  My  laws  in  their  hearts  and  put 
them  in  their  minds,'  but  having  first  —  not  last  —  cast 
their  sins  and  their  iniquities  into  oblivion  at  the  Cross." 

Then  followed  this  reference  to  Holiness: — 

"  Holiness  may  come  out  in  great  feats  and  acts  of  sac- 
rifice and  suffering,  and  it  often  does.     But  in  ten  thoa- 
Tol.  UCXTI.    No.  S04.    6 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


466  BibUotheoa  Sacra  [Oct. 

Band  thoosand  iuBtances  it  jnat  means  the  eacrifice  of  self 
in  a  little  thing,  tliough  it  ma?  mean  a  big  sacriflce  of  the 
self-spirit  which  assets  itself  so  desperately  —  a  quiet 
putting  of  that  down  in  the  name  of  the  Lord  Jeans;  the 
delightful  discover;  that  the  temper  can  be  sweetened,  and 
that  the  ton^e  can  be  cleaned,  of  what  is  evil,  what  is 
false,  and  what  is  unkind;  that  the  very  thoughts  can  be 
kept,  though  the;  have  been  all  too  long  and  guiltily  al- 
low^ play  on  forbidden  fields — that  they  can  be  kept  by 
this  wonderful  power  of  the  Qod  who  reveals  to  us  holi- 
ness by  faith." 

This,  in  turn,  naturally  led  to  a  statement  about  faith : — 

"Then  when  we  come  to  fmith,  what  does  it  mean?  Not 
an  abstract  theory,  a  metaphysical  conception,  a  some- 
thing floating  in  the  air  of  the  mind.  Faith  is  nothing 
without  its  object ;  faith  is  never  saving  without  the  right 
object.  Faith  means  its  object  taken  and  used;  faith 
means  a  trusted  Christ.  And  so  it  means  the  renovation 
and  the  purification,  and  the  uplift,  and  the  adjustment, 
and  the  happy  making  of  character,  and  of  life  in  the 
power,  through  the  Holy  Spirit,  of  a  trusted  Christ.  All 
this  '  Keswick '  seeks  to  teach,  not  to  terminate  in  the  be- 
liever, himself  or  herself;  not  that  we  may  wrap  ourselves 
in  a  robe  of  spiritual  comfort  and  a  subtle  self-satisfactioD 
supposed  to  be  satisfaction  in  Christ ;  but  that  we  may  be 
vessels  for  the  Master's  use." 

But  Bishop  Moule  went  even  further,  and  spoke  of  what 
Keswick  is  in  relation  to  preceding  times  and  other  as- 
pects of  truth: — 

"  It  [The  message  "  Holiness  by  Faith "]  was  brought 
forward  in  a  way  new  as  to  its  energy  and  its  definiteness 
in  that  long  ago,  in  1874,  and  it  would  be  known  of  the 
ages  before.  Baints,  scattered  about  in  untold  numbers, 
had  lived  it,  whether  they  wonid  have  stated  it  or  not, 
before.  But  the  blessing  and  benefit  of  this  place  is  that 
it  has  helped  to  make  it  current  coin ;  and  we  want  to  take 
the  coin,  and  not  hoard  it,  but  spend  it  to  the  glory  of  God, 
to  the  good  of  our  generation,  to  the  consoling  of  its  sor- 
rows, to  the  convincing  but  also  to  the  healing  of  its  sins, 
to  the  straightening  of  its  crooked  places,  and  making  the 
rough  places  smooth,  that  the  King  of  glory  may  come  in." 

It  wm  interest  many  to  know  how  the  Bishop  himself 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorioua  Ufe  457 

came  in  to  this  experieDce.  The  story  shall  be  told  in  his 
own  words  from  a  booklet  on  the  hymn  by  Charles  Wesley, 
"  Jeans  My  Strraigth,  My  Hope."  Here  is  the  Bishop's  tes- 
timony:— 

*'  I  cannot  make  the  quotation  without  recording  my 
debt  to  the  hymn,  a  deep  and  perpetual  debt,  incurred 
at  a  crisis  of  my  own  inner  life.  Years  after  a  definite 
couversion  I  made  new  discoreries  of  the  deceits  and 
treacheries  of  the  heart  towards  Ood,  and  the  conflict  of 
conscience  and  will  was  a  bitter  one.  In  much  trouble  of 
spirit,  walking  in  a  field  close  to  the  house  in  Scotland 
where  I  was  a  gnest,  I  found  myself  repeating  that  bymn, 
'Jesua  My  Strength,  My  Hope,'  learnt  in  early  childhood, 
and  often  sung  in  my  father's  Church.  It  struck  me  on 
a  sudden  tliat  the  teaching  of  the  hymn  was  just  this,  in 
essence,  that  the  revolution  of  spiritual  attitude  was  to  be 
attained  —  hy  getting  it  from  the  Lord!  It  was  to  be  the 
gift  of  Ood  to  the  soul  penitent  and  aubmiaaive  at  His 
feet;  a  gift,  given  on  purpose  to  be  ttged  in  a  happy  and 
disciplined  life  set  free  by  Him  from  the  bondage  of  self- 
will.  A  light  began  to  shine  through  my  clouds.  And 
that  very  evening,  at  a  meeting  held  in  a  ham  on  the  ea* 
tate,  two  addresses,  each  as  '  sober-minded '  as  possible, 
one  on  the  sins  of  Christian  lives,  the  other  on  the  remedy, 
Christ  trusted  and  submitted  to,  were  very  greatly  blessed 
to  me.  From  that  day,  amidst  many  failures  (all  by  my 
own  fault),  I  have  found  my  secret  of  spiritual  progress 
along  the  lines  of  that  hymn." 

To  show  the  practical  bearing  of  this  teaching,  which 
warrants  its  l>eing  described  as  teaching  on  and  for  the 
Victorioua  Life,  the  following  incident,  told  by  the  Bishop 
in  one  of  the  addresses  at  Keswick  last  year,  may  l>e  fitly 
given : — 

"  May  I  use  a  very  homely  illustration  from  the  expe- 
rience of  a  friend  of  former  days  when  I  taught  young  men 
at  Cambridge?  I  have  used  it  many  a  time  in  confirming 
dear  boys  and  girls  in  the  Diocese  of  Durham,  when  my 
addresses,  I  think,  tend  continually  more  and  more  to  an 
almost  grotesqneness  of  simplicity,  but,  when  I  come  to 
think  of  it  after,  I  have  done  little  but  try  to  speak  '  Kes- 
wick '  truth  to  them.  I  have  often  told  them  this  inci- 
dent; it  makes  trays,  particularly  listen.    There  came  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


468  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

me  one  da;  in  m;  study  at  Ridley  Hall  a  fine  young 
student  of  mine,  a  thoron^  Christian  man,  and  also  a 
very  good  footballer.  He  came  with  a  rather  melancholy 
face,  unlike  himself,  and  told  me  he  must  give  footbaJi  up. 
I  ask  him  why,  and  he  said  it  was  because  of  his  temper. 
He  had  a  hot  temper  and  he  lost  it  sometimes  in  the  game ; 
and  then,  of  course,  they  laughed  at  him  — '  a  Cbristiao 
—  and  in  a  passion! '  I  said,  *  I  don't  think  you  need  give 
the  game  up.  It  is  perfectly  right  for  yon  at  your  time  of 
life  to  play,  and  it  does  no  harm  to  a  Christian  man's  in- 
fluence to  play  a  good  game.  It  is  right  for  you  to  be  on 
the  football  fleld.  Where  it  is  right  for  ns  to  be  we  may 
be  assured  that  onr  Lord  Jesas  Christ  is  with  us,  and  in 
us,  as  snrely  as  at  a  prayer-meeting,  the  Church,  aye,  at 
the  Table  of  the  Lord.'  In  short,  I  reminded  him  that  he 
might  reckon  confidently  there  upon  his  Lord's  presence 
and  power.  'And,'  said  I  (it  was  after  I  had  been  con- 
vine^  of  '  Keswick '  truth),  '  do  not  so  much  try  to  keep 
your  temper  as  iostantaneonsly  to  ask  your  Lord  to  beep  it 
for  you,  at  the  moment,  in  the  very  rush  of  the  game.'  My 
friend  came  back  to  me  a  day  or  two  later,  with  a  face  quite 
different.  He  said,  'It  went  off  splendidly!  I  did  what 
you  said,  and  He  was  true  to  His  word!  I  said,  "Lord, 
take  charge!"  and  He  kept  my  temper  for  me.  He  kept 
me  sweet  and  pleasant,  and  I  never  enjoyed  the  game  so 
much ! '  I  think  —  and  I  always  say  this  to  my  young  lads 
in  Durham,  who  always  listen  keenly  to  that  story  —  I 
think  that  if  the  Lord  can  keep  the  heart  in  peace  in  the 
middle  of  a  game  of  football,  it  is  difficult  to  say  when  He 
cannot  do  it.  It  is  difficult  to  think  of  any  place  where  it 
is  fit  for  ns  to  be  (we  cannot  count  on  Him  if  we  wander 
where  we  have  no  business  to  be,  where  we  are  on  the 
devil's  ground,  and  need  not  be  there)  in  which  we  may 
not  claim,  may  not  use  the  trusted  Christ  to  give  peace  t» 
temper,  to  nerves,  to  will." 

Now  this  is  what  may  be  called  Keswick  teaching,  or 
rather,  as  I  would  dare  to  say,  this  is  New  Testament  Holi- 
ness as  expressed  by  one  of  the  best  and  ablest  men  of  onr 
time.  The  Bishop's  own  personal  experience  was  furth^ 
emphasized  the  other  day  by  a  brief  "  In  Memoriam  "  no- 
tice of  one  of  the  oldest  leaders  at  Keswick,  the  Bev.  Evan 
H.  Hopkins,  whose  valuable  book  has  already  bera  brou^t 
under  contributioD.    This  is  how  the  Bishop  speaks  of  Mr. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


X91«]  The  Victorious  ti/e  459 

Hopkins,  referring  to  tlie   same   incident   atready   men- 
tioned : — 

"  I  will  not  dwell  at  large  on  his  admirable  work,  in  his 
many  years  of  strength  and  activity,  as  a  teacher  of  un- 
surpassed luminous  force  in  the  Keswick  Tent  and  at  kin- 
dred gatherings,  not  to  speak  of  the  pulpit  —  a  teacher 
whose  message  perfectly  combined  the  call  to  surrender 
and  faith  for  inner  victory  and  purity  with  unshakable 
fidelity  to  the  truths  which  gather  round  justification 
through  the  Crucified  Christ  alone,  to  the  last  breath.  I 
would  only  here  gratefully  record  my  own  lifelong  debt. 
Kever  shall  I  forget  the  autumn  evening  in  1884,  in  a  great 
bam  in  Scotland,  filled  with  a  solemnly  listening  throng, 
when  Evan  Hopkins  met  a  great  and  profoundly  felt  need 
of  my  Boul  (awakened  into  new  intensity  just  then)  by  an 
unfolding  of  the  promises  of  the  Word,  promises  of  the 
lil>erty  found  only  in  surrender,  which  made  an  epoch  in 
my  life." 

In  this  connection  some  recent  words  of  that  well-known 
missionary  authority,  Dr.  Eugene-  Stock,  illustrate  and 
confirm  these  references  to  Mr.  Hopkins  and  Bishop  Moule. 
Dr.  Stock,  also  writing  an  "  In  Memoriam  "  notice  of  Mr. 
Hopkins  (in  the  London  Christian),  gives  these  reminis- 
cences, which  tell  their  own  story: — 

"  When  his  important  and  delightful  book,  The  Law  of 
Liberty  in  the  Spiritual  Life,  was  published  in  1884,  he , 
sent  me  a  copy,  and  asked  me  to  write  a  review  of  it  for 
the  Record.  I  felt  that  I  lacked  the  authority  to  do  that, 
especially  as  '  Keswick  teaching '  was  then  still  regarded 
with  suspicion  by  most  orthodox  Evangelical  clergjrmen. 
Even  Mr.  Webb-Peploe  (not  then  Prebendary)  was  him- 
self not  yet  accepted  as  a  leader  among  them.  But  I  went 
to  the  Editor  of  the  Record,  and  urged  on  him  the  impor- 
tance of  the  book  being  carefully  reviewed  by  a  recognized 
theologian  of  unquestioned  Evangelical  principles;  and  on 
his  asking  whom  I  would  suggest,  I  named  Mr.  Handle 
Moule,  Principal  of  Ridley  Hall,  Cambridge.  To  him,  ac- 
cordingly, the  book  was  sent;  and  thereby  hangs  a  tale. 
Mr.  Moule  wrote  four  important  articles  in  successive  is- 
snea  of  the  Record,  expressing  in  a  generous  Christian 
spirit  much  appreciation  of  the  book,  jet  upon  the  whole 
pronouncing  against  Mr.  Hopkins's  teaching.    They  were, 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


460  Bihliotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

of  conree,  not  sigDed,  in  accordance  with  the  practice  of 
those  days.  A  few  months  later,  a  letter  appeared  in  the 
same  joamal,  signed  '  The  Writer  of  the  Fonr  Papers,* 
stating  that  since  they  appeared  he  had  personally  met  Mr. 
Hopkins  and  others  of  the  '  Keswick  School '  and  that, 
while  not  at  all  moving  from  the  doctrinal  position  tak^ 
np  in  the  articles,  he  was  now  convinced  that  the  teaching 
of  these  men,  and  of  Mr.  Hopkins's  book,  was  not  incon- 
sistent with  it,  and  not  open  to  the  criticisms  then  current. 
'  Never,'  he  wrote,  '  I  say  it  earnestly  and  deliberately, 
have  I  heard  teaching  more  alien  from  perfectionist  error, 
more  justly  balanced  in  its  statement  of  possibilities  and 
limits';  and  he  added  some  solemn  and  significant  words 
as  to  the  effect  upon  himself  personally.  Although,  for  the 
time,  the  writer  of  the  articles  and  of  this  letter  retained 
his  anonymity,  the  essential  fact  became  known  through 
the  appearance  for  the  first  time  of  Mr.  Handley  Moule  as 
a  speaker  at  Midway  in  1885,  and  at  Keswick  in  1886;  and 
in  1890  he  told  the  whole  story  over  his  own  signature  in 
the  columns  of  the  Record." 

I  cannot  refrain  from  remarking  that  a  Movement  which 
can  obtain  the  clear  and  strong  adherence  of  such  a  loyal 
Evangelical  scholar  as  Bishop  Monle  is  not  to  be  lightly 
set  aside. 

I  pass  to  another  of  the  Keswick  leaders,  whose  mas- 
culine thought  and  vigorous  character  are  familiar  and 
welcome  to  all  who  have  had  the  privilege  of  hearing  or 
meeting  him,  Prebendary  Webb-Peploe.  I  heard  Dr.  H. 
C.  Mabie  once  say  that  no  man  had  made  a  deeper  impres- 
sion on  the  ministers  attending  Northfleld  than  Mr.  Webb- 
Peploe.  This  is  how  he  tells  the  story  of  the  beginning  of 
the  Keswick  Movement: — 

"  The  requirement  is  even  now  that  we  should  have  the 
Iiord  Jesus  Christ  as  the  perfect  Saviour,  as  our  life  —  Col. 
iii.  4 :  '  When  Christ,  who  is  onr  life,  shall  appear,  then 
shall  ye  also  appear  with  Him  in  glory.'  He  must  be  our 
life.  That  just  constitutes  the  difference  between  what  was 
apprehended  by  the  great  majority,  such  as  I  knew,  of 
Evangelical  Christians  before  the  Convention  came  in  1876, 
and  whet  we  onght  to  be  able  to  appr^end  now.  Ton  know 
that  this  Convention  started  in  Oxford  in  the  year  1874, 
and  in  the  spring  part  of  1876  the  Oxford  Convention  was 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorious  Ufe  461 

toUowed  by  the  Brighton  Convention,  and  from  the  Brigh- 
ton Convention,  some  two  monthe  later,  the  movement  was 
taken  by  dear  Oanon  Battersby  up  to  Keswicli.  We  came 
here  under  the  most  extraordinary  difBcnlties,  with  every- 
thing, apparently,  against  as,  particularly  the  popular 
opinion  of  the  newspapers,  the  Christian  editors,  as  they 
were  called,  writing  to  say  this  was  mere  empty  perfection- 
ism preached  by  men,  without  the  slightest  chance  of  its 
being  attained.  We  had  other  difficulties  when  we  arrived 
here.  We  came  believing  that  we  were  to  hear  almost  en- 
tirely throughoat  the  Convention  Mr.  Pearsall  Smith,  of 
America,  who  had  spoken  so  powerfully  at  Oxford  that 
every  person  I  have  ever  met  that  attended  the  Oxford  Con- 
vention, in  the  autumn  of  1874,  was  lifted  from  a  life  of 
depression,  or  pain,  or  shame  for  perpetual  failure,  into  a 
life  of  joy,  peace,  power,  and  spiritual  prosperity.  So  that 
those  men  and  women  who  came  from  the  Oxford  Con- 
v^ition  were  now  glorifying  God  at  every  point  in  the  body 
and  in  the  spirit,  which  are  His." 

He  also  compares  or  contrasts  this  Movement  with  some 
previous  experience: — 

"  For  what  purpose  are  we  assembled  at  the  Keswick 
Convention  ?  Pause  for  one  moment  that  you  may  realise 
or  apprehend,  every  one  of  you,  the  great  object  for  which 
these  gatherings  are  held.  I  have  had  the  solemn  privilege 
of  attending  every  one  of  the  forty-two  that  have  taken 
place,  except  one.  Therefore  I  know  a  little,  from  inner 
study,  of  what  was  intended  from  the  very  commencement, 
and  what  is  realised  after  forty  odd  years  in  our  present 
gathering  together. 

"Very  striking  it  is,  indeed,  to  think  of  the  distinction 
that  was  intended  from  the  very  commencement  to  be  found 
between  this  assembly  and  some  others  known  in  the  land. 
At  that  time  very  little  was  known  of  the  keeping  power 
of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Very  little  was  known  of  Him 
as  a  present  Saviour,  moment  by  moment.  Men  looked 
upon  Him  as  a  Savioar  in  regard  to  the  Atonement.  Onr 
fathers  of  the  Evangelical  school  brought  as  up  —  speak- 
ing of  myself  and  others  like  me  —  to  realise  Christ  as  the 
gift  of  Ood  to  pay  the  debt  of  humanity,  to  take  unto  Him- 
self the  whole  human  race,  in  order  that  He  might  atone 
for  man's  sin  before  Ood  and  by  the  blood  of  the  Lamb 
offer  pardon,  peace,  and  acceptance  with  God.  Blessed  be 
the  Lord  for  that  wonderful  Gospel  that  our  forefathers  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


4f&  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

the  Evangelical  echcwl  so  delighted  in  and  so  fervently  pat 
forward.  But,  brethren  and  sisters,  there  is  something 
more  than  this.  While  it  is  a  blessed  fact  that  we  trace 
every  gift  we  can  ask  for  or  receive  to  the  Lord  JesoB 
Christ  —  St.  Paul  prays  that  we  may  be  able  to  apprdiend 
with  all  saints  what  is  that  love  fonnd  in  Jesus  —  I  cannot 
but  fear  that  a  very  large  number  even  yet,  after  more  than 
forty  years  of  this  blessed  Qospel  of  a  saving,  keeping 
Christ  being  mentioned,  a  very  large  proportion  of  the 
Church  does  not  yet  know  experimentally  what  it  is  to  be 
saved  by  faith,  in  the  deepest  and  fullest  sense  of  that 
word." 

This  is  followed  by  an  instance  of  what  the  Holiness 
Movement  meant  to  one  man : — 

"  There  was  a  gentleman  living  some  ten  miles  from  my 
father's  home  in  Hertfordshire,  one  of  the  most  earnest 
Christian  clei^ymen  I  ever  knew,  but  he  was  overcome  by 
a  nervous  temperament,  and  perpetually  failed  to  be  caim 
and  quiet,  and  every  time  showed  exceedingly  painful  irri- 
tation, but  was  so  humble  that  he  would  come  to  the  very 
person  he  had  off^ided,  and  say,  '  Can  you  ever  forgive  me, 
my  brother  ?  Let  ns  pray  for  f oi^veness ! '  That  was  a 
man  who  yearned  for  peace,  but  could  never  attain  it.  He 
had  gone  with  his  wife  to  a  London  nerve  specialist  of  the 
highest  note,  who  told  her  that  his  trouble  was  mental  and 
incurable,  and  that  she  would  have  to  bear  with  it  till  her 
husband  died.  The  wife  died  first.  Then  the  Oxford  Con- 
vention took  place,  and  my  beloved  friend,  Mr.  Grane,  was 
there.  About  three  or  five  months  afterwards  be  was  per- 
suaded to  go  and  see  a  specialist  again  in  London.  The 
specialist  took  up  his  book  of  cases  and  looked  it  through, 
and  then  tamed  to  him  and  said,  '  Mr.  Qrane,  I  have  tiie 
joy  to  tell  you  that  everything  is  altered;  yoa  have  not 
one  symptom  of  disease  or  danger  that  I  noticed  twelve 
months  ago.  Have  you  been  to  another  physician?  If  so, 
tell  me  his  name.  Have  yon?*  'Yes,  I  have.'  'And  what  is 
his  name?  I  ought  to  know  it.'  'The  Lord  Jesas  Christ,* 
my  friend  replied,  and  from  that  moment  my  brother  Grane, 
whom  I  loved  deeply,  was  never  known  to  look  or  speak 
with  the  slightest  sign  of  irritation." 

I  submit,  with  all  deference  to  Dr.  Warfield,  yet  with 
perfect  confidence,  that  the  convinced  acceptance  of  the 
Keswick  Movement  by  sach  a  man  as  Prebendary  Webb- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorious  Life  463 

Peploe  is  impresaive  enough  to  make  people  inquire  whether, 
after  all,  it  does  not  stand  for  essential  Biblical  truth. 


A  tew  condnsions  ma;  be  sabmitted  for  consideratioD 
OD  this  whole  subject.  And,  first,  in  passing,  as  a  personal 
matter,  I  cannot  refrain  from  expressing  my  sincere  re- 
gret that  Dr.  Warfleld  has  allowed  himself  to  use  certain 
phrases  which  do  not  help  but  rather  hinder  the  cause  which 
he  and  we  have  at  heart.  He  writes  more  than  once  of 
"Mr.  Trumbull  and  his  coterie"  (pp.  352,  371);  of  "Mrs. 
H.  W.  Smith  and  her  coterie"  (p.  358);  of  Mr.  Trumbull 
inserting  an  adverb  as  "a  sop  to  Cerberus"  (p.  328) ;  of 
hia  always  baring  something  "up  his  sleeve"  (p.  355) ;  of 
an  assertion  which  is  said  to  be  "  a  bathos  of  inconse- 
quence"; and  of  Mr.  Boardman's  Higher  Christian  Life  as 
"a  rag-time  book"  (p.  582).  Even  though  Dr.  Warfleld 
feels  very  strongly  the  errors  of  the  Movement,  I  think  the 
matter, is  too  serious,  the  issues  too  profound,  and,  I  will 
venture  to  add,  the  men  and.  women  too  sincere  and  too 
much  in  earnest,  for  remarks  of  this  kind  to  be  made. 

Dr.  Warfleld  seems  to  imply  that  this  Holiness  teaching 
is  comparatively  recent,  coming  either  from  Mr.  Pearsall 
Smith  or  about  his  time;  but  there  are  those  who,  like  Dr. 
Andrew  Murray,  of  holy  mnnory,  maintain  that  the  teach- 
ing can  be  found  at  least  as  early  as  Walter  Marshall's 
"  Gospel  Mystery  of  Sanctiflcation,"  which  dates  from  the 
seventeenth  century.  Dr.  Alexander  Whyte  speaks  of  this 
book  as  a  "  profound  masterpiece." 

It  is  impossible  to  avoid  raising  the  question  whether, 
after  all,  Dr.  Warfleld  may  not  be  mistaken,  and  whether 
there  are  not  phases  of  New  Testament  truth  which  are 
valid  and  powerful  even  though  they  are  not  accepted 
by  him.  In  particular,  there  are  Kew  Testament  passages 
which  have  not  been  properly  faced  in  any  of  his  articles. 
Thus,  the  well-known  passage,  "  Sin  shall  not  have  domin- 
ion over  yon,  for  ye  are  not  under  law,  but  under  grace  " 
(Bom.  vi.  11),  does  not  seem  to  be  adequately  dealt  with. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


461  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

though  it  ia  vital  to  any  proper  consideration  of  the  sub- 
ject of  Christian  holiness.  There  are  other  passtiges  in  the 
New  Testament  which  teach  victory  as  clearly  as  possible, 
and  yet  they  do  not  seem  to  have  entered  within  the  con- 
sideration of  Dr.  Warfleld's  treatment. 

The  impression  made  on  me  by  reading  Dr.  Warfidd  is 
that  his  teaching  provides  no  real  Oospel  for  the  saint,  bnt 
only  for  the  sinner.  To  say  that  God  "cures  our  sinning 
precisely  by  caring  our  sinful  nature"  {p.  340),  whoi 
experience  in  general  gives  no  suggestion  of  any  such 
"  curing " ;  to  speak  of  Romans  vii.  as  a  chapter  in  which 
"  Divine  grace  is  warring  against  and  not  merely  counter- 
acting, but  eradicating  the  natural  evil  of  sin"  (p.  345), 
when  there  is  not  a  single  reference  in  the  ctiapter  to  the 
Holy  Spirit ;  to  state  that  God  is  "  eradicating  our  sinful- 
ness" (pp.  341,  344),  and  not  merely  counteracting  it, 
when  there  ia  in  general  no  evidence  of  this  in  Christian 
lives  —  all  this  tends,  in  my  judgment,  to  discouragement, 
disheartenment,  and  even  despair.  It  is  a  position  wliicb 
seems  to  be  expressed  in  these  words : — 

"  Must  I  go  on  In  sin  and  sorrow. 
Sunshine  to.dB7  and  clouds  to-morrow? 
FlTBt  I  am  sinnins,  then  repenting. 
Now  I  am  atitbbom,  now  relmUng." 

But,  on  the  other  hand,  to  tell  the  newly-awakened  soul 
that  sanctiflcation  is  obtainable  in  the  very  same  way  as 
justification,  through  faith;  that,  in  spite  of  the  evil  na- 
ture within,  there  should  and  can  be  continuous  victory 
because  of  a  continuous  reckoning  of  self  as  dead  to  sin 
and  living  to  God  (Kom.  vi.  11) ;  that  sin  will  not  have 
dominion  because  the  soul  is  "  under  grace  "  (Bom.  vi.  14) ; 
that  the  Spirit  dwells  within  in  order  to  prevent  the  evil 
nature  doing  what  it  would  otherwise  do  (Gal.  v.  17) ;  and 
that  in  all  things  the  soul  can  be  more  than  conqueror 
(Bom.  viii.  37)  —  all  this  seems  calculated  to  fill  the  soul 
with  inspiration,  Joy,  hope,  and  courage,  and  to  enable  it 
to  go  forward  with  confidence  and  expectation,  with  "a 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victorious  Life  465 

heart  at  leisore  from  itself,"  until  the  day  comee  when, 
either  at  death  or  at  the  Lord's  Coming,  there  will  be  ab- 
solnte  deliverance  from  the  very  presence  of  sin.  The 
"  complete  salvation  "  which  Dr.  Warfield  mentions  never 
comes  in  this  life,  but  it  will  come  hereafter.  Meanwhile, 
this  Gospel  of  "  sanctiflcation  by  faith,"  avoiding  the  one 
extreme  of  eradication,  and  the  other  of  mere  suppression, 
seems  to  me  the  complement  and  completion  of  that  old- 
fashioned  Evangelical  theology  of  which  Princeton  is  so 
noteworthy  an  exponent.  It  is  this  that  Scottish  Presby- 
terian clergymen  and  many  other  Evangelical  clergym^i 
from  England  have  found  to  be  their  joy,  comfort,  and 
strength;  and  it  is  this  that,  notwithstanding  Dr.  War- 
field's  severe  strictures,  his  consummate  theological  knowl- 
edge, and  his  acute  perception,  makes  ns  more  and  more 
certain  that  in  holding  it  and  teaching  it  we  are  absolutely 
loyal  to  the  "  old,  old  story." 

But  the  supreme  lack  in  Dr.  Warfleld's  articles,  as  I  read 
them,  is  the  absence  of  any  recognition  of  the  fact  that  the 
Movement  he  criticizes  and  condemns  expresses  a  spiritual 
experience  and  not  merely  a  theological  theory.  I  know,  of 
course,  that  the  two  are  united  as  cause  and  effect,  that 
experiaice  should  arise  out  of  theology.  Bnt  when  able 
and  clear-minded  Christian  men  bear  testimony  to  an  ex- 
perience which  they  associate  with  Christ  and  His  truth, 
when  this  testimony  comes  from  scholars  and  leaders  like 
the  Bishop  of  Durham  and  others,  who  are  unhesitatingly 
loyal  to  the  fundamental  realities  of  the  supernatural  rev- 
elation of  the  New  Testam^it,  it  seems  to  me  imperative 
that  this  experience  should  be  considered  and  the  fact 
and  meaning  of  it  explained.  No  experience  which  car; 
ries  moral  and  ethical  value  can  be  without  a  basis  of 
some  truth;  and  I  should  like  to  see  Dr.  Warfield,  with 
his  great  ability,  endeavor  to  discern  and  state  this  truth, 
even  though  in  so  doing  he  should  feel  it  necessary  to  dis- 
entangle from  it  any  theological  errors.  The  Mov^nent, 
as  a  whole,  the  men  who  teach  its  truths,  and  the  rich  ex- 
perl^ces  to  which  testimony  is  given,  call  for  this  thor- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


166  Bihliotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

ongh  inreetigatioD.  As  the  matter  now  stands,  Dr.  War- 
field's  criticisms  are  concerned  with  theological  theory, 
witbont  any  attempt,  so  far  as  I  can  jadge,  to  perceive 
and  appreciate  the  undoubted  spiritual  experience  onder- 
lying  the  Movement.  But  when  men  so  sober,  so  true  to 
Scripture,  so  loyal  to  Christ  and,  I  must  add,  so  many  of 
them  qualified  by  scholarship,  like  Bishop  Moule,  Drs. 
Laidlaw,  George  Wilson,  and  John  Smith  of  Edinburgh, 
Dr.  Elder  Gumming  of  Glasgow,  Prebendary  Webb-Peploe, 
and  the  late  G.  H,  C.  Macgregor,  not  to  mention  mauy 
more,  testify  to  the  possession  of  an  experience  which  has 
evidently  enriched  their  lives,  molded  their  characters, 
illuminated  their  doctrine,  fertilized  their  energies,  and 
inspired  their  efForts  for  Christ,  I  feel  that  these  teach- 
ings are  not  to  be  set  aside  by  any  purely  doctrinal  and 
theoretical  criticism. 

In  closing  this  article,  perhaps  I  may  be  permitted  to 
record  an  incident  which  bears  on  the  subject.  I  was  once 
staying  with  an  Evangelical  clergyman  in  England  who 
took  a  very  strong  line  against  Keswick  and  refiected  on 
it  for  what  he  regarded  its  errors,  in  the  light  of  what  I 
have  called  old-fashioned  Evangelicalism.  I  remarked 
that  the  name  "  Keswick "  was  of  little  moment  to  me, 
and  that  perhaps  I  had  an  advantage  over  some  of  my 
brethren  in  that  I  discovered  this  truth  before  I  knew  of 
such  a  place  or  a  Convention  as  Keswick.  Then  I  told  him 
how,  after  an  experience  in  the  spiritual  life  which  may  be 
described  as  "  up  and  down,"  I  gave  myself  to  prayer  and 
to  the  New  Testament  and  was  led  to  two  passages :  first, 
to  Bom.  vi.  13,  where  the  word  "  yield  "  came  home  with 
power,  and  then  to  1  John  ii.  28,  where  the  word  "  abide  " 
similarly  impressed  me.  I  saw  that  the  true  Christian 
life  meant  yielding  everything  to  God  and  then  remaining 
in  that  attitude ;  and  there  and  then  I  entered  into  a  spir- 
itual experience  of  light,  liberty,  joy,  and  power  to  which 
I  bad  been  hitherto  (through  my  own  fault,  I  admit)  a 
stranger.    And  when  some  months  after  I  took  up  (what 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  The  Victoriout  Life  167 

was  then)  a  monthly  magazine  The  Life  of  Faith,  I  recog- 
nixed  at  once  that  this  contained  the  very  teaching  which 
had  been  so  greatly  blessed  to  my  soul,  and  I  learnt  for 
the  flnt  time  of  the  existence  of  the  Keswick  Convention. 
I  "  drank  in  "  the  messages  and  rejoiced  in  the  confirma- 
tion thoB  afforded  of  my  own  personal  experiences.  And 
ever  since  then,  amid  many  failoree  to  realise  all  that  was 
mine  in  CliriBt,  yet  with  an  ever-deepening  conviction  and 
thankfulness,  I  have  believed  and  found  this  Holiness  teach- 
ing to  be  the  complement  of  tliat  E>rangeUcal  position  of 
Justification  by  faith  which  I  knew  from  earliest  days. 
This  fondamental  reality  and  its  corresponding  tmth, 
Sanctification  by  faith,  conatitnte  for  me  the  heart  and  core 
of  that  Ctospel  which,  for  sinner  and  saint,  is  "  the  power 
of  God  onto  salvation." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


CRITICAL  NOTES 

THE  EXODUS  AND  THE  CONQUEST  OF  THE  NEQEB 

Im  approaching  thu  subject  it  jb  necessary  once  more  to 
lay  stress  on  two  outstanding  points.  No  nation  would 
invent  to  its  own  disadvantage  a  story,  that,  on  attempt- 
ing an  invasion,  it  had  been  defeated  so  cmshingly,  and 
with  such  heavy  casualties,  as  to  be  compelled  to  wander 
in  a  wilderness  for  thirty-eight  years  before  embarking  on 
any  further  undertaking.  Once  this  is  realized  we  are 
compelled,  on  any  critical  view,  to  accept  the  defeat  re- 
corded in  Dent.  i.  43  ff.,  ii.  14,  as  absolntely  historical.  It 
must  be  realized  as  the  dominating  and  all-important  fact 
in  the  early  military  history  of  the  people,  and  it  fully  ex- 
plains the  retirement  from  the  Negeb  after  the  earlier  vic- 
tory (Num.  xxi,  1-3). 

Secondly,  emphasis  must  be  placed  on  the  close  parallel- 
ism between  the  Hebrew  and  Egyptian  accounts.  Accord- 
ing to  the  Pentateuch,  Israel  built  Pithom  and  Baamses  aa 
store  cities  for  the  Pharaoh  in  one  reign  of  long  duration. 
In  the  opening  years  of  the  next  they  were  decisively  de- 
feated with  heavy  casualties  in  the  south  of  Canaan  by 
vassals  of  Egypt.  As  a  result  the  country  enjoyed  a  lasting 
peace  from  the  Israelite  menace.  According  to  Egyptology, 
Pithom  and  Baamses  were  built  as  store  cities  for  the  Pha- 
raoh in  the  reign  of  Rameses  II.,  which  lasted  for  66  or  67 
years.  In  the  opening  years  of  his  successor,  Memeptah, 
the  people  of  Israel  was  decisively  defeated  with  heavy 
casualties  in  or  near  Canaan,  and  a  triumphal  hjrmn  cele- 
brates the  lasting  peace  that  this  and  other  events  have 
given  the  country  under  Egyptian  suzerainty.  These  two 
records  are  much  more  alilie  than  the  accounts  given 
of  the  same  event  by  warring  nations  nowadays,  and 
we  need  have  no  hesitation  in  recognizing  their  corre- 
spondence. There  cannot  have  been  two  peoples  of  Israel 
trapesing  about,  both  defeated  In  Canaan  with  heavy  cas- 
ualties in  Memeptah's  opening  years  in  such  a  way  as  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Critical  Notes  469 

give  the  coantry  dnrable  peace.  The  details  have  been 
worked  out  in  "  The  Date  of  the  Ezodns."  *  Here  it  is  suf- 
flcient  to  recall  these  salient  points.* 

Wh«i  we  pass  to  the  narratives  of  the  conquest,  we  find 
onrselves  confronted  with  three  queetions  which  are  closely 
related.  What  happened?  How  was  it  narrated?  How 
did  that  narrative  reach  its  present  form?  Generally  the 
answer  to  any  one  of  these  qaestions  helps  ns  to  find  the 
replies  to  the  others. 

Even  a  cursory  glance  at  the  conquest  narratives  shows 
that  they  have  passed  through  the  same  sort  of  vicissi- 
tudes as  has  the  Pentateach.  Once  more  we  have  evidence 
of  a  library  of  short  writings  surviving  in  a  fragmentary 
condition  and  placed  in  erroneous  order.  For  instance,  in 
Josh.  V.  13-15  we  read  of  an  interview  with  the  captain  of 
the  host  of  the  Lord,  but  his  message  is  missing.  The  be- 
ginning of  the  Bochim  narrative  (Judges  ii.  1-6)  is  want- 
ing. Careful  examination  shows  that  verses  2  ff.  postulate 
an  account  of  some  episode  which  called  for  the  rebuke  and 
consequent  weeping.  Other  instances  might  be  cited.  It 
is  as  easy  to  show  that  the  order  of  the  narrative  is  faulty 
in  Joshua  as  in  the  Pentateuch.  How,  for  example,  did 
Joshua  get  from  Gilgal,  where  we  find  him  in  chapter  x.,  to 
a  spot  80  near  the  waters  of  Merom  that  he  could  fight  there 
"to-morrow"?  (li.  6).  Or  from  Bhiloh,  where  the  preceding 
chapters  leave  him,  to  Shechem  in  chapter  xxiv.?  These 
narratives  all  require  the  same  kind  of  critical  examination 
and  piecing  together  as  those  of  the  Pentateuch.  The  edi- 
torial methods,  too,  appear  to  have  been  similar.  Thus  in 
Judges  ii.  1  it  is  generally  allowed  tliat  "Bochim"  of  M.  T. 
is  a  substitution  for  an  earlier  reading  "  Bethel "  (still  pre- 
served in  a  conflate  Greek  rendering) ,  and  that  it  is  due  to 
the  treatment  of    verse    5    as    a    canon    of    emendation. 

■  Blbllotheca  Sacra  Campanj.    20  c«nta,  postpaid. 

'See  now  Bollinger's  reluctant  admliston  In  reTlewlng  "The 
Date  of  the  Exodus  ":  "  Darilber,  daas  Nu  zlr  40  nlcht  den  Fharao 
ala  Qegner  rennt,  wlrd  slch  reden  lassen — warum  soil  eln  aolcher 
slch  nlcht  den  Sleg  elnes  Tasallen  gut  schrelbenT  "  (TheoIoglechQ 
Literaturteltung,  191i,  No.  8-7,  col.  76). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


470  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

Another  curioua  inBtance  ot  editing  occurs  in  Joeh.  zr.  63. 
The  difficulty  here  is  part  of  a  larger  question  raised  b;  the 
various  notices  of  Jerusalem,  and  historical  and  textual 
considerations  are  closely  interwoven.  Did  the  Israelites 
capture  Jerusalem  or  not?  Did  the  tradition  assign  it 
unanimously  to  Beujamin^  or  was  there  a  second  version, 
giving  it  to  Judah?  In  Josh.  zv.  63  the  B.  V.  has:  "And 
as  for  the  Jebusites,  the  inhabitants  of  Jerusalem,  the 
children  of  Judah  could  not  drive  them  out:  but  the  Jeb- 
nsitee  dwelt  with  the  children  of  Judah  at  Jerusalem,  unto 
this  day  ";  but  Armenian  codices  read  "  children  of  Israel," 
for  "children  of  Judah,"  in  the  first  part  of  the  verse. 
"Israel"  is  to  be  preferred,  tor  we  should  regard  the  alter- 
ations as  due  to  a  reader  who  thought  of  the  period  of  the 
divided  kingdom,  and  made  the  substitution  because  Jeru- 
salem was  in  Judah,  not  in  Israel.  Further,  the  words 
"with  the  children  of  Judah"  were  unknown  to  the  original 
LXX,  and  added  by  Origen  under  an  asterisk.  With  these 
corrections  the  trouble  disappears.  In  the  corresponding 
verse  in  Judges  i.  21  the  words  "in  Jerusalem"  are  not  in 
A  glnqw  Arm-codd,  Eth.  "The  Jebusite  dwelt  with  the 
children  of  Benjamin  till  this  day,"  but  not  in  Jerusalem ; 
for  it  is  obvious,  from  Josh,  zv.  63  and  Judges  zix.  11 1., 
that  the  Israelites  had  not  effected  a  settlement  there.'  In 
Judges  i.  8  we  read:  "And  the  children  of  Judah  fought 
against  Jerusalem,  and  took  it,"  etc.  As  the  statement  is 
plainly  nnhistorical,  it  is  generally  assumed  that  the  verse 
is  due  to  an  editor.  A  more  probable  suggestion,  however, 
lies  at  hand.  There  is  abnndant  evidence  that  the  text 
of  this  chapter  has  depended  on  a  damaged  HS.  Now  a, 
omits  the  name  Jerusalem.  It  is  likely  that  originally  some 
other  name  stood  there,  but  was  lost,  owing  to  injury  to 
the  archetype,  which  will  then  have  read,  "  fought  against 
.  .  .  and  took  it,"  To  repair  the  injury,  Jerusalem  was 
erroneously  added  in  most  copies,  on  the  basis  of  the  pre- 
ceding verse.  The  original  text  probably  named  some  city 
'  The  notice  Qma  appeara  to  have  been  written  before  David's 
coDQueBt  (2  Sam.  v.  6ff.};  notice  "till  this  day." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  471 

that  was  captured  before  Hebron  (cp.  Josh.  x.  29  ff.)- 
Longer  commentary  and  rewriting,  as  well  as  glossing, 
ttave  played  their  part  in  the  formation  of  the  present  He- 
brew text  of  Joshua,  as^anybody  who  reads  the  book  care- 
fully can  see  for  bimsdf.  The  LXX  often  enables  us  to 
recover  a  purer  text;  and  in  some  of  its  readings  it  sug- 
gests that  our  difiSculties  may  be  partly  due  to  the  colla- 
tion of  two  Hebrew  M8S.,  variants  from  one  having  been 
entered  in  the  margin  of  the  other,  and  then  unfortunately 
Incorporated  with  the  text  in  error  and  at  unsuitable 
points.* 

■Here  &re  the  two  tormB  of  Joefa.  vlU.  11-lS,  gtven  by  B  and 
M.  T.,  reBpecUvely: — 

B  M.  T. 

11  And  all  the  people,  Uie  11  And  all  the  people,  [even]  the 
men  of  war  with  blm,  went  [men  of]  war  that  were  with  him, 
up,  and  drew  nigh,  and  came  went  up,  and  drew  nigh,  and  came 
before  the  city  on  the  Ea»t.      before  the  city,  and  pitched  on  the 

north  aide  of  Ai:  no^B  there  jwm  a 
volley  between  him  and  Ai. 

12  And  the  ambush  of  the  12  And  he  took  about  five  thou- 
cltr  [was]  on  the  west.              »and   men,   and   set   them  in   am- 
bush   hetween  Bethel   and   Ai,   on 
the  weet  side  of  the  city. 

13  Tacttt.  13  Bo  thev  tet  the  people,  even 

all  the  hott  that  tcaa  on  the  north 
of  the  (Htv,  and  their  Hers  In  wait 
that  were  on  the  west  of  the  city; 
and  Jothua  went   that  night  into 
the  midtt  of  the  vale. 
In  yer.  13,  fifteen  Hebrew  MS3.  read    l^,  '  and  he  lodged,'  for 
^<1,  '  and  he  went.'    The  last  half  of  this  Hebrew  veree,  then,  dif- 
fers from  the  last  half  of  ver.  9  by  a  single  letter,  Joshua  lodging 
In  the  midst  of  the  Taltey  pojrn,    which  Is  distinguished  from  the 
Hebrew  for  '  the  people '  only  by  Its  final  letter.     Similarly  the 
last  portion  of  ver.  12,  "  between  Bethel  and  between  Ai,  on  the 
west  side  of  the  city  "  (Tpn)  Is  a  variant  of  the  corresponding 
words  in  ver.  9,  where  "on  the  west  of  Ai"  lacks  the  last  letter 
of  the  Hebrew  word  for  "city,"  but  Is  otherwise  absolutely  Iden- 
tical.   These,  then,  are  different  readings,  and  the  codex  that  pre- 
served them  apparently  read  5  thousand  for  the  30  thousand  of 
the  Hebrew,  and  the  3  thousand  of  dpt  In  ver.  3.  and  seems  to  have 
located  the  attack  on  the  north,  not  on  the  east,  side  of  the  city. 
Vol  LXXVI.    No.  304.    6 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


472  BibliotKeca  Bacra  [Oct. 

If,  in  the  light  of  these  obsOTrations,  we  ask,  Wliat  was 
the  course  of  events  in  the  conquest  of  the  Negeb?  we  shall 
have  little  difficulty  in  finding  a  satisfactory  answer. 
When  the  Israelitee  were  at  Ead^h,  th^  won  a  consid- 
erable victory  in  the  Negeb,  and,  in  accordance  with  their 
vow,  devoted  a  place  and  called  it  Hormah  (Num.  zzi. 
1-3).  After  the  subsequent  rout  compelled  their  retreat, 
the  place  was  natnrally  known  once  more  by  its  earlier 
name.  Of  this  process  the  history  of  our  own  time  snp- 
plie«  abundant  examples.  Thirty-eight  years  later  the 
Israelites  invade  from  the  East.  Jericho  and  Ai  are  tak^, 
and  Oibeon  makes  its  peace  with  the  invaders.  A  coali- 
tion takes  the  field  against  Joshua  and  the  Israelitee,  and 
it  is  important  to  note  that  it  includes  the  king  of  Hebron 
(Josh.  X.).  This  shows  that  the  subsequent  battle  is  earlier 
in  time  than  Caleb's  capture  of  Hebron.  Had  the  city 
already  fallen,  there  could  have  been  no  king  of  Hebron. 
Much  unnecessary  difficulty  has  been  created  by  the  fail- 
ure to  recognize  the  character  of  the  tasks  that  lay  before 
the  invaders.  They  fall  into  three  categories:  (1)  the  de- 
feat of  the  field  armies  of  the  nations;  (2)  the  capture  of 
the  walled  cities;  and  (3)  the  conquest  of  the  level  coun- 
try, where  chariots  could  operate.  In  the  third  task  they 
were  usually  unsuccessful,  the  battle  of  the  waters  of  Me- 
rom  (Josh.  xi.  1-9)  being  the  only  recorded  victory  during 
this  period  over  forces  with  chariots  (contrast  Josh.  xvii. 
16;  Judges  i.  19).  So  far  as  the  Negeb  was  concerned,  the 
battle  of  Beth-horon  was  decisive  (Josh.  x.).  In  those  days 
most  campaigns  culminated  in  a  single  pitched  battle.  The 
forces  of  the  period  had  neither  the  discipline  nor  the  re- 
serves to  enable  them  to  continue  a  campaign  in  the  open 
after  a  defeat.  The  survivors  of  the  beat^i  Canaanites 
consequently  dispersed  immediately  to  their  walled  cities 
(Josh.  X.  20).    That  enabled  the  various  tribes  to  overrun 

Cle&rlr  we  bave  to  do,  not  with  two  accounts  or  the  saiae  occur- 
rence, but  with  two  tonuB  of  the  same  account;  and  onr  trouble 
has  arisen  through  variants  harlng  been  noted  in  the  maiBtn  and 
subsequently  been  mistaken  for  part  of  the  text 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  il^ 

the  opm  hill  coimtry,  vhere  chariots  could  not  operate, 
and  to  Tin  sach  Bocceseea  as  they  coald  agalnet  the  forti- 
fied tOTOS.  It  must  always  be  borne  in  mind  that  a  de- 
feated field  army  in  that  epoch  promptly  ceased  to  exist 
as  an  effective  campaig;niiig  force;  so  that  after  the  victory, 
the  work  of  occupation  would  be  carried  out  by  smaller 
tril>al  detachments  operating  separately,  not  by  the  united 
forces  of  Israel. 

With  one  exception  (Josh.  x.  28  ff.)  the  narratives  of  the 
occupation  of  the  South  country  are  then  in  harmony. 
After  the  battle  of  Beth-horon,  Caleb  receives  a  formal 
title  to  Hebron  from  Joshua  at  Gilgal  (Josh.  xiv.  6ff.). 
Caleb,  Judah,  Simeon,  and  the  Kenites  invade  the  South 
country,  as  narrated  in  Judges  i.  (cp.  Josh.  xv.  13 fl.),* 
their  expeditions  l>eing  based  on  Jericho  (Judges  i.  16  (.) ; 
and  when  Hormah  is  recaptured,  the  Isradite  name  is  nat- 
urally reconferred.* 

That  leaves  the  problem  presented  by  Josh.  x.  28  ff., 
where  Joshua  and  all  Israel  take  various  towns  and  ex< 
terminate  all  the  souls  therein.  The  stereotyped  formnlse 
suggest  an  editor ;  but,  as  Dr.  Q.  A.  Cooke '  remarks  on 
verse  33a :  "  The  monotony  is  here  broken  by  what  looks 
like  an  early  piece  of  detail."  In  this  respect  tlie  section 
recalls  the  editorial  rewriting  practiced  in  the  Pentateuch 
in  cases  where  the  narrative  was  too  fragmentary  to  be 
perpetuated  in  the  form  in  which  it  had  survived.*    I  sug- 

■  Judges  I.  20  should,  however,  perhaps  stand  between  1.  10 
and  11. 

*We  do  not  know  whether  a  change  of  name  In  Bucb  a  ca«e  In- 
volved a  rellglouB  ceremony;  but,  In  any  case,  a  name  conferred 
by  an  Invading  people  would  be  valid  only  where  It  remained  in 
control  of  the  place.  Compare  Isaac's  renaming  of  Abraham's 
wells  (Gen.  xxvl.  18). 

'The  Book  of  Joshua  (1918).  This  Is  a  clear  and  np-todate 
anmmary  of  the  views  of  the  documentary  theorists,  and  Is  the 
moat  helpful  book  thej  have  produced  in  Engllah  on  thle  period, 
largely  because  the  editor  candidly  states  objections  to  bis  own 

•  See  BS,  April,  1919,  pp.  193  ft.  Joshua  xl.  21-23  Is  wanting  In 
h,  and  appears  to  be  the  addition  of  a  late  commentator. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


171  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

geat,  therefore,  that  this  may  have  been  the  origin  of  the 
section,  and  that  ve  owe  its  present  form  to  an  editor  who 
fonnd  his  materials  in  tatters,  and  pieced  them  together 
as  best  he  could  in  his  own  language.  Unfortunately  he 
assumed  that  Joshua  and  all  Israel  were  present  on  occa- 
sions when,  in  reality,  only  detachments  were  operating, 
and  butchered  all  the  inhabitants  of  the  country  in  accord- 
ance with  his  reading  of  Deut  vii  2.  If  these  two  fea- 
tures be  eliminated,  the  basis  of  the  narrative  harmonixes 
with  our  other  information  and  may  well  be  historical. 

A  few  words  may  be  added  as  to  a  curious  theory  that 
has  received  wide  currency,  viz.  that  Jndah,  Caleb,  and 
the  Kenites  effected  their  settlement  in  the  South  as  the 
result  of  a  successful  invasion  from  Kadesh-bamea.  This 
is  flatly  contradicted  by  the  whole  tenor  of  the  Pentateuch, 
according  to  which  all  Israd  wandered  for  forty  years, 
and  invaded  as  a  united  confederacy  from  the  East.  It  is 
incompatible  with  the  sweeping  disaster  narrated  in  Deut. 
i.  43  ff. ;  with  the  narrative  of  Judges  i.  16  f .,  which  shows 
that  Hormah  was  finally  occupied  by  an  expedition  moving 
from  Jericho ;  with  all  the  narratives  of  Caleb's  conquests ; 
and  with  the  presence  of  a  king  of  Hebron  among  the  al- 
lied powers  defeated  by  Joshua  at  Beth-horon.^ 

Harold  M.  Wibnbr 

London,  England 

NOTES  ON  THE  EXODTJS 

Further  research  enables  me  to  supplement  "  The  Date 
of  the  Exodus  "  °  with  a  few  notes  on  the  history  of  the 
period  of  the  Exodus  and  the  wanderings. 

In  Exodus  xiii.  17  we  read :  "And  it  came  to  pass,  when 
Pharaoh  had  let  the  people  go,  that  Ood  led  them  not  by 
the  way  of  the  land  of  the  Philistines,  although  that  was 
near;  for  God  said.  Lest  peradventure  the  people  repent 

'Cp.  Cooke,  op.  ct(,,  pp.  sxvlt,  xxlx,  xxxl, 

■Blbllotheca  Sacra,  July.  1916,  pp.  464-480.  republiahed  In 
pamphlet  form  b?  BIbliotfaeca  Sacra  Company  (20  cents,  post- 
paid), cited  as  DE. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Noteg  475 

when  they  see  war>  and  they  return  to  Egypt."  The  ex- 
pression "  see  war,"  naturally  interpreted,  can  only  mean 
that  war  was  in  progress  in  Philistia.^  A  good  example  of 
what  the  text  does  not  say  is  provided  by  Driver's  note 
ad  loo. :  "  Becanse  the  Philistines  were  a  warlike  and  ag- 
gressive people  it  was  feared  that  Israel  might  be  alarmed 
at  meeting  them."  There  is  nothing  about  meeting  or 
fighting  them.  The  phrase  used  implies  that  military  op- 
erations were  actually  pending  at  the  time,  —  not  that  they 
would  result  if  Israel  took  the  road  through  Philistia  and 
were  refused  peaceful  passage.  Now  the  Israel  stele  also 
refers  to  military  operations  of  some  sort  in  Philistia. 
"Carried  off  is  Aakalon  "  (DE,  p.  457).  These  two  refer- 
ences appear  to  me  to  relate  to  the  same  event  and  to  sup- 
plement each  other.  The  carrying  off  of  Askalon  was  thus 
contemporaneons  with  the  Exodus,  and  must  be  (^signed 
to  the  same  year,  i.e.  the  second  year  of  Memeptah.  So 
we  have  independent  evidence,  from  other  sources,  of  at 
least  three  of  the  matters  to  which  the  final  stanza  of  the 
triumphal  hymn  relates.  There  is  an  allusion  to  the  treaty 
with  the  Hittites,  a  mention  of  a  capture  of  Askalon,  and  a 
reference  to  Israel's  defeat  by  Amorites.  These  fall  at  dif- 
ferent times,  and  exclude  the  theory  that  the  stanza  re- 
lates to  a  campaign,  i.e.  to  a  connected  aeries  of  operations. 
It  is  rather  a  sort  of  omnibus  clause  relating  to  a  num- 
ber of  miscellaneous  incidents,  which  together  ultimately 
helped  to  bring  about  the  grand  result  of  a  general  peace 
that  was  satisfactory  to  Egypt.  This  view  is  confirmed 
by  another  consideration.  It  has  been  thought  that  the 
phrase  "  binder  of  Gezer "  in  a  titulary  refers  to  a  per- 
sonal exploit  of  Memeptah's.  Whether  this  be  so  or  not, 
its  presence,  taken  in  conjunction  with  the  absence  of  any 
similar  title  relating  to  the  other  events  mentioned  in  the 
stanza  (the  peace  with  the  Hittites,  the  carrying  off  of 
"The  mention  of  tlte  Pblllatlnes  here  and  In  Qeneals  haa  been 
wrODglr  supposed  to  be  an  anachronism.  There  is  archieologlcal 
erideoce  of  tbe  presence  of  Philistines  on  the  coast  strip  In  the 
first  half  of  the  second  millennium  b-c.  See  F.  M.  Th.  B&hl,  Het 
Oude  Testament  {1919},  p.  107  (a  very  good  book). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


476  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

AskalOQ,  etc.),  shows  that  for  eome  reason  it  vas  on  a  dif- 
ferent footing  from  them.^  Accordingly  they  must  not  all 
be  lamped  together  as  forming  part  of  a  single  connected 
design. 

On  page  461  of  DE  I  expressed  the  view  that  the  word 
"  retamed,"  in  the  border  commandant's  journal,  probably 
meant  "  retnmed  to  Egypt."  Since  that  was  written  I 
have  had  official  experience  in  government  departments. 
Coming  back  to  the  study  of  the  journal  in  the  li^t  of 
this,  I  am  definitely  of  the  opinion  that  the  difficulties  of  the 
modem  reader  are  due  to  the  fact  that  the  tabular  form 
had  not  been  invented.  When  we  throw  the  information 
into  the  shape  a  modem  official  would  give  it,  everything 
becomes  clear.  Now,  as  then,  the  prepositions  would  be 
omitted,  but  the  document  would  be  called  by  some  such 
name  as  register,  and  the  facts  would  be  set  out  in  ruled 
and  headed  columns.  It  is  evident  that  it  relates  to  the 
journeys  not  of  private  messengers,  but  of  royal  diapatch 
bearers,  going  to  or  from  the  court.  That  is  why  the  name 
of  the  sender  is  omitted  when  the  couriers  "  went  up,"  i.e. 
made  the  journey  outwards,  but  expressed  when  they  "  re- 
turned," i.e.  homewards.'  Royal  couriers  traveling  out- 
wards necessarily  came  from  the  court.  Here  are  two 
specimen  entries,  taken  from  Breasted's  translation  in  his 
"Ancient  Records  " : — 

"Year  3,  first  mouth  of  the  third  season  (ninth  month), 
fifteenth  day: 

"  There  went  up  the  servant  of  Baal,  Boy,  son  of  Zcper 
of  Gaza,  who  had  with  bim  for  Syria  two  different  letters, 
to  wit:  (for)  the  captain  of  infantry,  Khay,  one  letter; 
(for)   the  chief  of  Tyre,  Baalat-Remeg,  one  letter." 

"Year  3,  first  month  of  the  third  season  (ninth  month), 
— th  day: 

■Possibly  this  acUevement  alone,  of  Uioae  here  mentioned,  was 
due  to  native  Egyptian  troops.  Compare  the  obserratlona  ot  N»- 
vllle  Quoted  infra. 

'Similarly  the  addressee  Is  omitted  In  the  case  of  homeward 
messengers,  but  expressed  where  the  dispatches  are  tnivelinc 
outward. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919] 


Critical  Votet 


477 


"  There  returned  the  attendant,  Thutiy,  son  of  The- 
kerem  of  Geket;  Methdet,  son  of  Bhem-Baal  (of)  the  same 
(town)  J  Sutekbmose,  son  of  Eperdegel  (of)  tbe  same 
(town),  who  had  with  him,  for  the  place  where  the  king 
was,  (from  ')  the  captain  of  infantry,  Khay,  gifts  and  a  let- 
ter" 

Nowadays  anch  information  would  be  recorded  eome- 
what  as  follows: — 

REGISTER  OP  ROYAL  COURIERS 


^1 


Kbtv 

).  TIm  chid  of 

Tyr*.  Bul- 


Tliuilr.ai 
McthdM.  el 
Suiekhaod 


It  will  be  seen  that,  in  spite  of  the  omissions  of  the  pre- 
positions, this  record  is  entirely  unambiguous  and  busi- 
nesslike.   It  is  only  necessary  to  restore  tbe  background. 

I  have  now  seen  a  paper  by  Professor  Kaville,  entitled 
"  Did  Menephtah  invade  Syria  ?  "  in  the  Journal  of  Egyp- 
tian AreJuEology,  vol.  ii.  (1915)  pp.  195-201.  This  was 
unknown  to  me  when  I  wrote  DE.  The  following  con- 
firmation of  the  view  I  reached  may  be  cited  from  page 
201:— 

"  Thus  the  last  lines  of  the  stele  show  that  the  safety  of 
the  king  is  complete.  .  .  .  There  is  no  indication  whatever 
that  this  state  of  things  was  due  to  the  victories  of  the 
king.  He  is  not  mentioned  as  conqueror;  it  is  not  said 
that  personally  he  did  anything  in  tbe  destruction  of  Ash- 
kelon  or  Inuamma.    It  would  be  quite  contrary  to  Egyp- 

■Breasted  (AR,  vol.  ill.  p.  272)  supplied  "for."  but  note  the 
verb  "returned"  (to  Esypt).    Khar  was  In  Sjrla. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


478  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct. 

tian  inscriptions  auch  as  we  know  them,  to  forget  in  that 
way  the  great  deeds  of  their  king.  Every  victory,  every 
contest,  is  due  to  the  king  himself.  ...  No  more  than  the 
day-book  of  the  official  does  this  inscription  record  a  con- 
quest of  Menephtah  in  Palestine.  The  successful  campaign 
attributed  to  him  is  a  mere  hypothesis  resting  on  two  texts 
neither  of  which  gives  any  indication  whatever  of  this  war, 
and  still  less  a  positive  proof.  It  must  therefore  be  en- 
tirely struck  out  of  the  annals  of  Menephtah." 
This  strikingly  agrees  with  the  conclosions  of  DE. 

In  Num.  XX.  1,  B"  {vtd.)  p  make  the  children  of  Israel 
reach  the  desert  of  Zin  in  the  third  month,  not,  as  does  the 
M,  T.,  in  the  first*  "  Third  "  might  possibly  be  a  Gre^ 
mistake  for  "  first  "<TPI  fornPil),but  this  is  improbable. 
Historically  "  third  "  is  an  admirable  reading.  It  would 
mean  the  third  month  of  the  second  year,  which  is  tbe  last 
mentioned  in  the  preceding  narrative.  That  fits  the  thirty- 
eight  years  of  Dent,  ii.  14  better  than  the  first  month  of 
the  third  year.  Moreover,  the  incidents  after  leaving  Sinai 
are  inadequate  for  ten  months'  work.  After  the  departure 
on  tbe  twentieth  of  the  second  month,  the  narrative  tells 
of  a  three  days'  journey,  the  Taberah  incident  (which  is 
perhaps  out  of  position^),  Kibroth-hattaavah,  and  Haze- 
roth.  Then  they  pitched  in  the  wilderness  of  Paran  (Num. 
xii.  16).  The  next  event  is  the  arrival  at  Kadesh;  lor,  as 
we  have  seen,'  the  intervening  chapters  are  misplaced. 
The  embassy  to  Edom  (Num.  xx.  11  ff.)  should  precede 
the  command  to  compass  Mount  Seir  (Num.  xiv.  25) ;  and 
the  reference  to  the  failure  to  enter  the  promised  land 
(Num.  xvi.  14)  is  later  than  the  defeat,  wliich  in  turn  fol- 
lowed tbe  command  to  compass  Mount  Seir  (Num.  zlv. 
45).    There  is  nothing  in  the  history  that  would  create 

'The  matter  Is  complicated  by  the  fact  that  tbe  two  HSS.  do 
not  agree  in  tbe  order  of  tbe  phrases.  B*  apparently  had  "  into 
the  desert  or  Zin  in  the  third  month";  p,  "in  the  third  month 
Into  tbe  deeert  of  Z."  Such  variations  usually  mean  tbat  a  phrase 
bae  been  inserted  (In  this  Instance  "the  desert  of  Z."};  and  It  !■< 
in  fact,  very  likely  tbat  the  Teree  has  grown  In  trausmisBlon. 

'EPC.  p.  96,  note. 

•EPC,  pp,  114-138;  BS,  Oct  1918. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Critical  Notes  479 

any  difficalty  for  the  view  that  the  arrival  at  Kadesh  took 
place  at  some  time  in  the  third  moDth  of  the  second  year, 
but,  as  ve  see,  much  to  support  it.*  Moreover,  the  absence 
of  any  mention  of  the  year  in  Num.  xx.  1  tells  in  its 
favor.  This  is  natural  in  the  case  of  a  month  of  the  year 
last  named  in  the  narrative,  but  impossible  on  any  other 
dating;  and  modem  commentators  who  accept  the  month 
of  the  M.  T.  have  accordingly  been  driven  to  suppose  that 
the  year  has  been  cut  out  of  the  text. 

Thus,  if  we  ask,  What  happened?  we  get  a  satisfactory 
reply.  The  Israelites  left  Sinai  in  the  second  month,  i.e. 
alK>at  May,  and  reached  Kadesh '  in  the  third  {about 
June).  We  find  the  spies  at  Eshcol  in  July.  The  defeat 
which  forced  the  evacuation  of  the  Hormah  is  then  to  be 
placed  about  August  of  the  second  year.  Thirty-eight 
years  later,  in  the  fortieth  year,  the  brook  Zered  is  crossed. 
Unquestionably  that  is  a  much  less  artificial  interpreta- 
tion of  the  expression  "  thirty-eight  years  "  than  any  other 
that  can  be  suggested.  Further,  we  understand  why  the 
history  of  the  thirty-eight  years  is  so  largely  a  blank.  All 
preparations  had  been  made  for  a  successful  invasion  in 
the  second  year.  The  failure  entailed  the  long  period  of 
wandering  till  a  new  generation  of  better  morale  had  more 
than  made  good  the  heavy  casualties  sustained  in  the  de- 
feat. But  just  because  it  had  been  intended  to  make  the 
entry  earlier,  there  was  notbing  left  to  do  in  the  way  of 
preliminary  ©ionization  and  legislation.  The  long  era  of 
renewed  growth  and  preparation  was  consequently  marked 
by  no  new  developments,  for  no  fresh  needs  of  importance 
could  arise  in  the  desert  to  give  occasion  for  additional 

'  This  would  not  affect  ttae  dating  of  the  Bzodue  and  make  Her- 
neptah'B  third  rear  a  poeBtble  date  for  tbat  event,  since  tbe  oc- 
Gurrencea  from  the  death  of  the  Fharaofa  of  the  opDreselon  are  In- 
sufficient to  fill  a  space  of  over  two  years. 

*At  this  point  It  may  be  mentlooed  that  the  Identification  of 
Kadeeb-bamea  with  Aln  Kadele,  which  at  one  time  seemed  cer- 
tain, appearB  to  have  been  rendered  very  difficult  by  C.  Leonard 
WooUey  and  T.  E.  Lawrence's  volume  on  The  Wlldemeas  of  Zln 
(Palestine  Exploration  Fnnd  Annual,  for  1914-15). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


480  Bibtiotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

iDstitntiODB.  Littie  if  anything  can  be  referred  to  this 
period  because  of  its  character. 

Onr  second  test  is,  How  was  it  told?  This  question,  too, 
admits  of  a  completely  Batisfactory  answer.  In  the  or- 
dinary course  of  the  narrative  a  reference  to  the  third 
month  following  on  one  to  the  second  month  of  the  second 
year  is  natural  and  needs  no  explanation.  This  is  much 
less  artificial  than  to  suppose  that  the  year  once  stood  in 
Num.  XX.  1  and  has  been  cut  out. 

There  r^nains  only  the  question,  How  did  the  narrative 
reach  its  present  condition?  And  this,  too,  we  shall  be 
able  to  answer  if  we  compare  tbe  other  passage  in  which 
the  number  of  the  month  has  suffered.  In  Num.  xxxiii.  38 
Aaron  dies  in  the  fifth  month  according  to  M.  T.,  but  in 
the  first  according  to  the  Syriac  and  Bahidic.^  Obviously, 
then,  the  Sahidic  here  presents  the  original  reading  of  the 
LXX.  Otherwise  it  would  not  agree  with  tbe  Syriac  against 
the  M.  T.  Now  if  we  examine  the  two  passages  in  their 
present  positions,  we  shall  see  that,  according  to  these 
variants,  Aaron  dies  in  the  first  month  of  the  fortieth 
year;  while,  according  to  Num.  xx.  1,  the  Israelites  do  not 
reach  Eadesh  till  the  third  month  of  an  unspecified  year. 
It  was  only  necessary  for  an  editor  to  come  to  a  con- 
clusion that  this  year  was  the  fortieth  —  a  view  which 
has  been  held  by  many  modem  commentators  —  for  him 
to  infer  that  the  text  was  wrong,  since  Aaron  could  not 
have  died  a  couple  of  months  before  the  arrival  at  Eadesh. 
Emendations  in  the  light  of  the  principles  of  those  days 
followed,  with  the  result  that  the  double  error  was  intro- 
duced. Fortunately  not  all  our  authorities  have  suffered 
in  either  passage,  so  that  it  is  possible,  with  the  assistance 
of  Deuteronomy,  to  restore  the  true  readings  in  the  light 
of  historical  textual  criticism. 

My  attention  bas  been  drawn  to  a  little  slip  on  page 

469  of  DE.    I  there  stated  that  the  significant  part  of 

Y-sh-p-'-r  had  only  one  letter  (y)  in  common  with  Joseph. 

The  Egyptian  p,  however,  usually  corresponds  to  the  He- 

'Tlie  Bohaliic  omlta  "on  the  first  of  the  moDth." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


19191  Critical  Notes  481 

brew  p,  BO  that  the  identification  la  impossible  only  on 
the  gronnd  of  the  dlCTerence  in  the  sibilant 

In  view  of  the  extraordinary  persistence  of  the  error 
vhlch  identifies  Hebrews  with  the  Habiru  (DE,  pp.  471  ff.), 
it  is  well  to  retnm  to  the  subject.  The  Assyriologists  now 
admit  that  the  two  words  cannot  correspond.*  Dr.  C.  F. 
Bnmey  writes :  "  Habiru  Is  not  a  gentillc  form  like  He- 
brew sing.  '7?{f  pinr.  0"??P  (the  Babylonian  gentUic  form 
would  be  HabirA),  bnt  a  substantive  form  likei3]P  with  the 
nominative  case-ending"  (Israel's  Settlement  in  Canaan 
[1918],  p.  69).  But  Eber  is  a  personal  name  like  Snooks. 
One  wonders,  therefore,  whether  the  AssyriologlBts  who 
still  Insist  on  the  identification  have  been  through  the  pas- 
sages where  the  word  occurs,  and  have  tested  their  theory 
by  seeing  whether  a  personal  name  could  be  substituted 
in  each  case  without  damage  to  the  sense.    Are  the  gods 

■Prafessor  Luckenbill  puts  some  of  the  arKuments  quite  cleariy: 
"  It  is  noticeable,  bowever,  that  since  a  reference  to  tbe  '  gods  of 
the  Habblri'  was  dlscorered  on  one  of  the  Boghas-Keul  docn- 
mentB  It  has  been  found  more  neceseary  than  ever  to  luBlet  that 
the  Hebrews  could  have  been  onlr  a  part  of  the  Hablri  mentioned 
In  the  Amama  Letters.  This  became  Imperative  when  It  devel- 
oped that  8A-OAZ  people  were  mentioned  aa  early  as  2000  b.o.  In 
a  letter  of  Hammnrahi  to  Sin-ldlnnam.  The  fact  Is  that  hal>biri 
seema  to  have  been  one  of  two  (the  other  waa  haWalv)  worda 
meaning  'plunderer,'  or  tbe  like,  which  might  be  written  idee- 
graphlcallr  In  tbe  Babylonian  as  BA-OAZ.  Purthennore  it  nema 
evident  that  this  idet^ram  and  its  phonetic  equlTalents  were  used 
to  designate  from  at  least  2000  b.o.  the  nomadic  tribes  llvtog  to 
the  west  of  Babylonia,  whose  depredations  no  doubt  warranted 
the  application  of  the  name  '  plunderer '  to  them.  The  writer  Is  of 
the  opinion  that  the  linguistic  difBcultieB  in  the  way  of  identify- 
ing hObMri  with  'Hebrew'  are  much  more  serious  than  Is  usually 
suppHosed"  (Am.  Jour.  Theol.,  toI.  xzll.  pp.  36t.).  In  a  footnote 
he  adds:  "The  word  hofibiri  Is  probably  a  tottil-fonn,  like  halt- 
batn  (kattal),  not  =  ''dblr>"db<T  (participle),  as  B«hl  thinks 
(.Kanaanier  und  SebrHer,  p.  89).  Besides,  the  g^tlUc  'ibri^ 
'  Hebrew '  can  hardly  have  come  from  the  partldpta]  form  'Sbir. 
The  Old  Testament  Is  right  In  regarding  'eber,  '  Heber,'  aa  the 
name  from  which  the  gentillc  Is  derived.  No  more  could  the 
gentillc  be  formed  from  a  kattH-tona  like  habbiri." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


482  Bibliotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

of  the  Habbiri  to  be  conceived  as  the  equivalente  of  the 
gods  of  the  SDOokees?  Or  is  amdltitfl  H&biru  a  phrase  of 
the  same  character  as  Snooks  men?  Further,  when  we 
are  told  that  the  correspondence  of  Habini  with  Eber  is 
"perfect,"  we  must  be  carefnl  to  remember  what  this 
really  means.  If  we  assume  that  the  word  Habiru  is  a 
transliteration  from  Hebrew  —  of  which  there  is  not  a 
particle  of  evidence  —  then  one  of  eight  sets  of  Hebrew 
conaonantB  which  it  ma;  represent  is  formed  by  the  con- 
sonants of  Eber.  In  other  words,  on  a  purely  consonantal 
basis,  there  are  seven  other  equivalents  just  as  "  perfect " 
as  Eber.  If  we  ask  the  advocates  of  the  theory  for  any 
evidence  that  the  Habiru  were  Semites  at  all,  they  have 
none  to  offer.  Indeed,  we  know  of  two  men  who  are  de- 
scribed as  Habireeans  (which  would  be  the  gentilic  of  Ha- 
biru) and  who  bear  Cassite  names.  The  Cassites,  however, 
were  not  Semites.  These  facts,  therefore,  so  far  as  they 
go,  create  a  slight  presumption  that  the  Habiru  were  not 
Semites.  For  the  identification  of  the  Hebrews  with  all 
or  a  part  of  them  there  is  neither  evidence  nor  probability. 
If  Habiru  is  a  proper  name,  it  is  not  Semitic:  if  it  is  a 
word  meaning  "plunderers"  {which  seems  probable), 
there  is  nothing  very  extraordinary  in  the  fact  that  one 
of  eight  possible  transliterations  of  its  consonants  into 
Hebrew  should  give  us  the  consonants  of  the  name  Eber. 
That  is  the  sole  basis  of  the  literature  which  has  arisen  on 
the  identification.^ 
One  other  matter.  An  attack  has  been  made  on  the  char- 
■On  pp.  469  f.  of  DE  It  was  pointed  ont  that  Berdtnans  (Vor- 
geBctilchte,  pp.  6S-67)  had  dlBproved  the  IdentlAcatlon  of  a  dis- 
trict mentioned  la  Kgrptlan  texts  wttb  Asher.  As  bis  work  is  not 
available  In  English  It  may  be  desirable  to  say  Gomethlng  more 
of  bis  arguments.  In  the  first  Anastasi  papyrus  we  read:  "Tbj 
name  becomes  as  famous  to  them  as  the  name  of  Qad'arde;,  the 
prince  of  'Eaaru"  (A.  Erman,  Life  In  Ancient  Egypt  [E.  T.  1S94], 
p.  3S2).  That  la  the  only  name  we  have  of  an  Inhabitant  of  the 
country,  and  It  is  not  Semitic.  Its  first  two  syllables  would  cor- 
respond to  a  Hebrew  nxp  °'  "np  <cp.  also  H.  Burchardt,  Die  Alt 
Kanaan&lschen   Premdworte  und    Elgennamen  Im  ^gyptischen  II 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Cntical  Notes  483 

acter  of  the  Biblical  narrative  on  the  groaod  that  the 
Pharaoh's  name  is  omitted.  Ed.  KOnig  (Die  Qenesie  ein- 
geleitet,  Obersetrt  und  erkiart  [1919] )  points  out  that  this 
is  in  accordance  with  contemporary  Egyptian  custom,  the 
name  being  at  that  time  omitted  where  the  title  "  the 
Pharaoh"  was  used  (p.  90).  According  to  B6hl  {op.  oit., 
p.  106),  the  Egyptians  avoided  nttering  the  name  of  the 
king  without  need.  He  compares  the  modem  Turlcieh  use 
of  the  Bublime  Porte  with  the  practice  of  employing  the 
phrase  "  Pharaoh  "  (lit.  great  house). 

Habolu  M,  WiBKaB 
London,  England 

THE  TEXT  OF  EXODUS  XVIIL  10  P. 

Tbb  M.  T.  of  Ex.  xviii.  10  f.  exhibits  a  corruption  of  con- 
siderable palteographical  interest.  Literally  it  runs  as 
follows :  "  [10a]  And  Jethro  said,  Blessed  t>e  the  Lord, 
who  bath  delivered  you  out  of  the  hand  of  Egypt,  and  out 
of  the  hand  of  Pharaoh ;  [10b]  who  bath  delivered  the  peo- 
ple from  onder  the  hand  of  Egypt  [11a]  Now  know  I  that 
the  LoBD  is  greater  than  all  gods,  [lib]  for  in  the  matter 
which  they  acted  presumptuously  against  them."  As  they 
stand,  both  verses  are  meaningless.  Verse  10b  cannot  pos- 
sibly be  right  after  10a,  and  lib  makes  no  sense  whatever. 

An  earlier  stage  of  the  text  can,  however,  be  recovered 
from  the  old  authorities.  The  LXX  lacks  10b.  For  lib 
the  liatin  had  "  qui  liberavit  famulos  auos  de  manu  eorum 
[IftlO],  p.  49,  No.  960).  There  are  no  Semitic  names  beginning 
tbud. 

Purther,  the  natural  Egyptian  transliteration  of  the  A  ot  Aetier 
would  not  be  1,  which  Is  what  we  find,  and  the  e  of  Aaher  does 
not  appear  In  the  l-s-rw  of  the  Egyptian  word.  As  we  see,  Erman 
makes  the  name  'Esarn,  not  Asber  at  all.  The  Egyptian  conso- 
nants may  correBpond  to  a  Hebrew  noK  or  libM.  neither  ot  which 
Is  at  all  like  Asher.  The  preanmptlon,  therefore,  is  entirely  against 
the  IdentlBcation.  Elerdmane  also  shows  that  the  poeiUon  of  the 
district  is  quite  uncertain.  The  contentltm  that  it  corresponds 
with  the  territory  ot  the  tribe  Aeher  conseguently  breaks  down. 
History  is  not  to  be  rewritten  on  the  basis  of  such  data. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


481  BibUotheoa  Saora 

qni  deprimebant  illos."  *  This  makes  excellrait  soiae ;  bnt  it 
Is  curions  to  find  part  of  10b  followed  by  something  like 
lib  as  one  coDtinnous  passage,  and  it  is  necessary  to  in- 
qoire  how  the  one  text  could  have  arisen  from  the  other. 
The  cmx  of  the  matter  seems  to  lie  in  the  apparent  cor- 
respondence of   xnxi  (his  servants)   in  the  one  text  with 
Cjm  (the  people)  and  the  myaterious  "1213  (in  the  matter) 
in  the  other.    It  looks  as  if  the  word  for  servants  had  got 
divided  after  the  first  letter.    Perhaps  jf  nK  '?nn  ivk  was 
inserted  above  the  line  in  a  carelessly  written  MS.  and 
vna  was  taken  into  the  next  line  thus : — 
y  nx  Wn  tvH  (njnn  i*di  concluding  the  preceding  verse) 
o'nWi  'jsa  mrr  'ra  '3  twt  nny 
'ji  n3 

Subsequently  the  supralinear  words  were  mistaken  for 
a  part  of  the  preceding  verse  and  incorporated  in  it,  the  V 
being  regarded  as  an  abbreviation  of  OSii  (the  people),  and 
the  phrase  being  rounded  off  from  the  context.  The  ms 
and  words  following  were  converted  into  what  we  have, 
V13  becoming  *i3-i3  (in  the  matter).  Tben  *3  was  inserted 
to  make  the  passage  read,  and  consequential  alterations 
were  made;  "from  the  hands  of  those  who  acted"*  being 
changed  into  "  which  they  acted,"  etc.  This  leads  back  to 
a  text  in  which  10a  was  followed  by  "  Now  know  I  that  the 
Lord  is  greater  than  all  gods,  for  that  he  hath  delivered 
his  servants  from  the  hand  of  those  who  acted  presumptu- 
ously °  against  them." 

If  this  is  approximately  correct,  it  is  important  to  note 
that  it  gives  us  an  idea  of  the  length  of  a  line  of  Hebrew 
writing  in  one  of  the  ancestors  of  the  M.  T.  ["  Now  know 
I "  down  to  "  gods."]  h,  u,  w. 

"The  wbole  clause  is  omitted  by  p.  The  ezpl&iia,tloii  ma?  be 
SB  follows:  In  an  ancestor  the  original  LXX  wblcb  the  Latin 
renders  was  deleted,  and  a  translation  ot  the  present  Hebrew  in- 
serted as  a  correction  in  the  margin.  A  scribe  then  copied  the 
mutilated  text,  but  omitted  to  talie  in  the  marsinal  addition. 

'The  verb  Is  uncertain.  DeitrimebatU  may  stand  for  some  He- 
brew word  for  "oppress." 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


NOTICES  OF  RECENT  PUBLICATIONS 

1am  Empim  op  thi  Ahoritis.    By  Aiabbt  T.  Cut.    Sto. 

Pp.  192.     New   Haven:     Yale  UniTeraity  PresB.     1919. 

f2.60. 

This  book  i8  Volume  VI.  of  the  "  Yale  Oriental  Series. 
Beeearches."  A  new  book  from  the  band  of  Professor 
Cla;  awakens  great  expectations.  He  stands  easUy  in 
the  front  rank  of  ABsyriologistB.  There  are  not  more  than 
two  or  three  in  the  country  who  rank  with  him.  His  many 
TOlnmes  of  beautifully  copied  and  scientifically  edited 
texts  are  eloquent  witnesses  to  his  industry  and  skill. 

The  volume  before  ns  is,  however,  of  a  different  order. 
In  it  he  baa  returned  to  the  subject  treated  in  his  "Amurru : 
The  Home  Qf  the  Northern  Semites"  (1909).  During  the 
ten  years  that  have  elapsed  since  the  publication  of  that 
book,  the  subject  has  grown  in  Professor  Clay's  mind.  He 
has  also  gathered  much  new  material.  He  is  now  con- 
vinced, as  the  title  of  his  new  volume  indicates,  that,  as 
Sayce  and  Wright  forty  years  ago  by  research  and  insight 
brought  to  light  the  long-forgotten  empire  of  the  Hittites, 
so  now  he  can  duplicate  their  feat  in  the  ease  of  the 
Amorites. 

In  treating  his  subject  he  passes  in  review  a  great  mass 
of  material,  as  the  titles  of  bis  chapters  indicate.  These 
are:  "The  Home  of  the  Semites,"  "The  Country  Amurru," 
"  Excavations  in  Amurm,"  "  The  Races  of  Amurru,"  "  The 
Language  and  Writing  of  Amurru,"  "  The  Name  Amurru 
or  Urn,"  "  Amorites  in  Babylonia,"  "  Early  Babylonians 
in  Amurni,"  "  Ur  the  Capital  of  Amurru,"  "  Other  Meso- 
potamian  Kingdoms,"  "  Mediterranean  Kingdoms,"  "  Am- 
orites in  Cappadocia,"  "  Egypt  and  Amurru,"  "  Amorites 
in  the  Old  Testament,"  "  Assyria  and  Amurru,"  "  The 
Deities  of  Amnrm." 

The  principal  positions  taken  in  these  chapters  are: 
(1)  that  in  the  third,  fourth,  and  fifth  millenniums  b.c. 
there  existed  an  Amorite  empire  stretching  from  the  Medi- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


186  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct  ■ 

terranean  across  northeni  Arabia  to  Babylonia;  (2)  that 
the  city  of  Agade  was  a  part  of  it;  (3)  that  it  was  the 
land  of  this  empire,  Amnrrn,  that  furnished  Arabia  with 
its  Semitic  population,  and  not  vice  versa;  (4)  that  the 
capital  of  this  empire  was  Mari,  an  ancient  city  on  the 
Euphrates,  which  was  prominent  long  l>efore  the  time  of 
Sargon,  and  which  Professor  Clay  conjectures  was  called 
also  Urn  or  Amnrrn,  and  was  the  Ur  of  the  Chaldees  from 
which  Abraham  came.  The  empire  of  the  Amorites  which 
is  thus  postulated  possessed,  it  is  contended,  a  high  civili- 
zation;  also  a  system  of  writing,  which  has  been  lost,  bat 
which,  Clay  believes,  may  yet  be  recovered. 

This  revolutionary  hypothesis  is  set  forth  with  great 
confidence  and  conviction.  It  may  possibly  be  true;  but, 
in  all  candor,  it  must  be  said  that  this  volume  does  not 
prove  its  truth.  Professor  Clay  assumes,  for  example, 
that,  if  he  can  discredit  the  hypothesis  that  Arabia 
was  the  cradle-land  of  the  Semites,  he  has  established 
Amurm  as  their  cradle-land.  He  accordingly  spends 
many  pages  arguing  against  the  Arabian  theory  —  pages  in 
which  he  does  not  seriously  touch  the  most  weighty  consid- 
erations in  its  favor  —  and  presents  no  real  evidence 
in  favor  of  Amurm.  The  effect  which  the  Amurru  hy- 
pothesis has  had  upon  the  mind  of  the  able  and  dis- 
tinguished author  may  be  seen  on  page  64,  where  it  is 
argued  that  the  Amorites  must  have  had  a  script  of  their 
own  which  they  employed  on  perishable  material,  because 
none  of  their  writing  has  been  found!  Professor  Clay  is 
much  more  at  home  in  editing  texts  than  he  is  in  critical 
investigatioDS  and  historical  reconstructions.  The  diflS- 
culty  with  "  The  Empire  of  the  Amorites"  is  the  same  that 
beset  its  predecessor,  "  Amurru" :  it  is  built  too  largely 
upon  etymological  derivations.  An  etymology  can  never 
prove  an  historical  equivalence.  At  most  it  establishes  a 
possibility.  Unless  there  is  better  than  etymological  evi- 
dence to  rely  upon,  it  is  unsafe  to  assume  that  such  a  pos- 
sibility is  a  reality.  In  the  book  before  us  this  distinction 
is  at  many  critical  points  overlooked.    We  have  to  render 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Ifoticea  of  Recent  Publications  487 

accordingly,  with  reference  to  the  main  thesis  of  the  book, 
the  Scotch  verclict,  "  Not  proven." 

The  last  chapters  of  the  book,  from  Chapter  XI.  to  the 
end,  vhicb  deal  with  the  relations  of  the  Amorites  to  Cap- 
padocia,  Egypt,  Palestine,  Assyria,  and  vbich  treat  of 
varioos  kingdoms  of  Mesopotamia  and  the  Mediterranean 
coast,  are  excellent  and  accurate  summariee  of  the  present 
state  of  oar  knowledge  with  reference  to  these  things. 
Here  oar  aatfaor  is  at  his  best,  and  his  wide  and  accurate 
knowledge  is  admirably  exhibited.  Indeed,  this  knowl- 
edge is  manifested  on  every  page  of  the  book.  It  is  not 
often  that  he  is  at  fault.  One  such  instance  we  note  on 
page  104,  where  he  follows  Thureau-Dangin  in  identifying 
Eesh  with  Opis,  and  has  overlooked  the  fact,  that,  on  a 
later  page  of  the  work  to  which  he  makes  reference,  the 
French  savant  has  given  a  better  and  different  reading. 

Notwithstanding  that  the  book  does  not  carry  convic- 
tion as  to  its  main  thesis,  it  is  one  which  lays  aU  scholars- 
under  deep  obligation.  One  lays  down  the  book  with  a 
sense  of  deep  gratitude  to  the  author.  Nowhere  else  ia 
there  so  compact  and  np-to-date  a  history  of  the  kingdoms, 
and  subjects  treated  in  Chapters  XI.-XVII.  AU  the  latest 
bits  of  evidence  are  gathered  and  woven  into  an  interesting 
whole;  and,  although  one  is  compelled  to  dissent  from  the 
main  thesis  of  the  book,  it  is  a  distinct  gain  to  science  to 
have  the  theory  set  forth,  that  It  may  be  tried  out  and 
tested  by  investigation  and  criticism. 

Obobgb  a.  Babton 

Bryn  Mawr,  Pennsylvania 

8>LXCTB0  Tbuple  Docuhbnts  op  the  Ur  Dtnastt.  By 
Clabbncb  Elwooo  Kbisbe,  Ph.D.  Ninety  Autographed 
Plates.  4to.  Pp.  56.  New  Haven:  Tale  University 
Press.    1919.    $5.00. 

Bbcx>bds  feom  Ue  and  Larsa  Datbd  in  thb  Larsa  Dynasty. 
By  Ettalbnh  Mbars  Geicb,  Ph.D.  Eighty-eight  Auto- 
graphed Plates.  4to.  Pp.  58.  New  Haven:  Yale  Uni- 
versity Press.    1919.    $5.00. 

These  are  Volumes  IV.  and  V.  of  the  "Tale  Oriental 
Vol.  LXXVI.    No.  804.    7 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


488  B&iKotheoa  aacra  [Oct 

Series.  Babylonian  Texts,"  edited  by  Professor  Clay.  They 
have  been  written  by  two  of  his  ablest  and  most  ac- 
complished pnpils,  and  are  each  a  valuable  addition  to 
Assyriological  literature.  Thongh  botti  volumes  are  de- 
voted to  contract  or  basiness  tablets,  of  which  so  many 
have  been  fonnd  in  Babylonia,  they,  like  all  each  collec- 
tions, can  be  made  to  yield  much  historical  information. 
Indeed,  it  is  from  the  painstaking  study  of  the  ofBcials 
and  date-formuhe  of  such  documents  that  a  great  deal  of 
our  detailed  information  of  Babylonian  history  comes. 
The  authors  of  these  volumes  have  done  their  work  with 
care  and  thoroughness,  and  have  gleaned  a  number  of  new 
and  valuable  facts.  The  purpose  of  these  publications  is, 
however,  to  make  the  cuneiform  texts  accessible  to  schol- 
ars. The  authors  have  therefore  given  full  treatment  to 
the  historical  data  elsewhere. 

Of  the  323  texts  contained  in  Dr.  Reiser's  volume,  58 
are  contracts  and  loans;  20  record  dealings  with  pateaia, 
or  rulers  of  cities;  32  are  records  of  various  kinds,  which 
aro  so  dated  as  to  contribute  valuable  chronological  in- 
formation ;  32  are  orders ;  58  relate  to  temple  employees 
who  were  hired  out  for  various  purposes ;  and  118  are  of  a 
miscellaneous  character.  One  of  these  (No.  323),  the  last 
tablet  in  the  volume,  especially  interests  the  reviewer.  It 
is  an  account  of  reeds  for  binding.  In  Babylonia  reeds 
were  employed  in  lieu  of  binding-twine ;  and,  at  least  in  the 
time  of  the  Dynasty  of  Ur,  great  stores  of  these  were  kept 
on  hand.  Various  kinds  were  employed  for  various  pur- 
poses. It  would  seem  that  a  reed-harvest  occurred  when 
the  reeds  had  reached  the  proper  maturity,  and  accounts 
were  carefully  kept  of  the  quantity  gathered,  the  quantity 
brought  over  from  the  previous  year,  and  the  quantities 
given  out  from  this  store  during  the  year.  The  numbers  in 
these  accounts  run  into  the  hundreds  of  thousands.  Until 
the  appearance  of  Dr.  Reiser's  volume,  but  three  such  texts 
were  known  to  the  reviewer.  Two  of  these  were  published 
by  Thureau-Dangin  from  the  Louvre  Collection;  and  the 
third  is  in  possession  of  Haverford  College.    Dr.  Reiser 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  489 

has  made  a  welcome  addition  to  tbis  very  interesting  little 
groap. 

Dr.  Orice's  volume  contains  263  texts  from  the  time  of 
the  Dynasty  of  Larsa.  They  consist  of  legal  contracts  and 
temple  records  of  varlona  kinds.  The  temple  records  are 
often  very  long.  While  groups  of  tablets  from  this  dy- 
nasty have  been  published  by  Strassmaier,  Chiera,  and  Fig- 
ulla  in  collections  partly  made  up  of  tablets  from  other 
dynasties,  no  volume  had  ever  been  wholly  made  up  of  such 
texts.  The  period  is  a  somewhat  obscure  one  in  Babylon- 
ian history,  and  the  data  furnished  by  Dr.  Qrlce's  work 
supplement  admirably  data  furnished  by  recent  publica- 
tions of  Professor  Clay  and  Tbureau-Dangin.  The  tablets 
were  written  partly  at  Larsa  and  partly  at  Ur. 

In  addition  to  much  miscellaneous  information  of  espec- 
ial interest  to  the  Assyriologist  two  features  deserve  par- 
ticular mention.  One  text  (No.  98)  is  a  student's  exercise. 
It  indicates  that  at  Ur,  as  well  as  at  other  Babylonian 
cities,  a  scribal  school  was  maiotained  in  connection  with 
the  temple.  Seven  tablets  record  the  delivery  of  sheep  to  a 
class  of  men  designated  SA-QAZ,  the  ideogram  by  which 
the  Habiri  are  designated  in  the  El  Amama  letters.  It 
has  been  su^ested  that  they  may  have  been  serving  in 
Babylonia  as  mercenaries.  At  all  events,  it  is  interesting 
and  important  to  find  these  men  in  Babylonia  a  thousand 
years  before  we  find  them  in  Palestine. 

The  texts  of  both  volumes  are  copied  with  all  the  skill 
and  care  which  we  have  come  to  expect  from  Professor 
Clay  and  bis  pupils,  and  the  volumes  are  beautiful  exam- 
ples of  book  making.  a.  a.  b. 

Cheonologt  of  the  Larsa  Dynastt,  By  Ettalene  Meabs 
Gricb,  Ph.D.  8vo.  Pp.  43.  New  Haven:  Yale  Univer- 
sity Press.    1919.    fl.OO. 

Patesis    op    the    Ur    Dynasty.       By    Clarbncb    Elwood 
KeiseBj  Ph.D.     With  a  Chart  Containing  a  Synchronis- 
tic  List.     8vo.     Pp.   34.     New   Haven :   Yale   University 
Press.    1919.    fl.OO. 
These  monographs  form,  respectivdy,  Parts  I.  and  II.  of 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


490  Bibliotlieca  Sacra  [Oct. 

Volume  rv.  of  the  "  Yale  Oriental  Series.  Beaearches." 
Each  coDtaina  the  results  of  historical  researches  into 
which  its  author  was  led  while  prepariog  the  volume  of 
cuneiform  texts  noticed  above. 

The  Yale  Babylonian  Collection  contains  an  unusually 
large  number  of  tablets  dated  in  the  time  of  the  Dynasty  of 
Larsa.  Dr.  Qrice  in  her  monograph  has  utilized  informa- 
tion from  all  these  as  well  as  from  those  published  in  her 
Tolume  of  Larsa  texts,  and  has  by  painstaking  labor  filled 
numerous  gaps  and  corrected  errors  in  our  knowledge  of 
the  chronology  of  this  dynasty.  While  her  volume  was 
passing  through  the  press  a  number  of  her  conjectures  were 
confirmed  by  Thureau-Dangin's  publication  of  a  text  in  the 
liOuvre  Collection. 

Dr.  Reiser's  monograph  collects  the  names  of  all  known 
Babylonian  pateaia  during  the  time  of  the  Dynasty  of  Or. 
From  the  tablets  of  the  Yale  Collection  he  has  added  the 
names  of  several  hitherto  unknown.  One  interesting  fact 
which  his  researches  have  brought  to  light  is  that  a  pateH 
might  be  transferred  from  one  city  to  another,  as,  in  more 
modem  times,  a  bishop  may  be  transferred  from  one  see  to 
another. 

The  authors  of  both  these  monographs  have  laid  all  As- 
syriologists,  and  especially  all  future  historians,  under  ob- 
ligation to  them.  It  is  npon  such  painstaking  work  by 
specialisfiB  that  historians  must  depend.  None  bat  a  spec- 
ialist could  glean  from  scattered  technical  publications 
the  many  important  facts  here  collected,  and  sift  and  clas- 
sify them.  G.  A.  B. 

The  Blind:  Their  Condition  and  the  Work  Being  Done 
for  Them  in  the  United  States.  By  Habsx  Best,  Ph.D., 
author  of  "The  Deaf:  Their  Position  in  Socie^  and  the 
Provision  for  Their  Education  in  the  United  States." 
8vo.  Pp.  ixviii,  763.  New  York:  The  Macmillan  Com- 
pany.   1919.    14.00. 

Until  recently  the  interest  of  tie  general  public  in  the 
blind  has  been  almost  wholly  sentimental,  resulting  in  a 
great  number  of  efforts  to  alleviate  their  condition  and  to 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publicatvyna  491 

give  them  support.  In  this  the  general  public  baa  not  been 
deficient  in  efforts  to  express  its  Bympatby.  It  is  estimated 
tbat,  counting  the  lack  of  earning  power  of  the  blind,  and 
adding  to  it  the  amount  expended  directly  in  their  behalf, 
it  gives  as  "  nearly  thirty-one  million  dollars,  as  the  total 
annual  cost  of  the  blind  in  the  United  States"  (p.  96). 
The  present  volume  is  a  thesaurus  of  information  con- 
cerning the  blind  in  the  United  States,  treating  the  sub- 
ject in  seven  parts :  I.  Oeneral  Condition  of  the  Blind ; 
II.  Blindness  and  the  Possibilities  of  Its  Prevention;  III. 
Provision  for  the  Education  of  the  Blind;  IV,  Intellect- 
ual Provision  for  the  Adult  Blind;  V.  Material  Provision 
for  the  Blind;  VI.  Organizations  Interested  in  the  Blind; 
VII.  Conclusions  with  Respect  to  the  Work  of  the  Blind. 
Part  II.  is  of  special  interest,  as  showing  to  what  ex- 
tent blindness  is  preventable  and  the  snccess  already  at- 
tained in  its  prevention.  For  example,  of  the  pupils  in 
schools  for  the  blind,  those  blind  from  opthalmia  neon- 
atorum are  23  per  cent,  all  of  which  might  have  been 
prevented  by  proper  attention  of  nurses  and  physicians 
officiating  at  birth.  The  importance  of  enforcing  regula- 
tion by  the  state  is  manifest.  The  spread  of  trachoma 
can  also  be  prevented  by  "  the  compulsory  reporting  to 
health  authorities  of  all  cases;  rigorous  follow-up  work 
in  the  way  of  treatment  of  such  cases  .  .  .  periodic  exam- 
ination of  school  children  .  .  .  the  r^;ulation  of  common 
lavatory  facilities  in  public  places,  and  ...  the  conducting 
of  a  thorough  campaign  of  education  respecting  the  dis- 
ease" (pp.  158,  lf>9).  But  as  yet  only  the  beginning  has 
been  made.  In  some  portions  of  Kentucky  13  per  cent  of 
the  population  were  afflicted  witji  trachoma;  but  by  far 
the  larger  number  of  cases  of  blindness  is  due  to  accidents 
of  one  kind  and  another,  many  of  which  could  be  cured 
or  alleviated  by  prompt  medical  attention.  E^e  strain  is 
to  be  charged  with  no  little  baneful  results.  This  is  due 
to  the  defective  lighting  arrangements  in  school  buildings, 
and  to  poorly  printed  books.  Of  more  than  half  a  million 
children  in  certain  large  cities,  15  per  ceat  were  discovered 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


492  BibUotheoa  Sacra  [Oct. 

to  have  «ye  defecta.  It  Is  pleaBant  to  note  "  that  blindness 
has  within  a  measurable  time  shown  on  the  whole  a  de- 
crease  .  .  .  and  that  the  chances  are  that  in  the  future  this 
decline  will  continue,  perhaps  at  an  accelerated  rate " 
(p.  243).  A  chapter  of  special  interest  treats  of  "The 
Indemnities  Paid  for  the  Loss  of  Sight:  Through  Work- 
men's Compensation  Laws."  The  importance  of  helping 
the  blind  to  be  in  some  d^ree  self-snpporting  is  duly 
presented.  The  most  feasible  plan  for  such  hdp  is  found 
in  the  establishment  of  shops  where  certain  classes  of  work 
can  be  done  by  the  blind  under  supervision,  but  it  must 
not  be  expected  that  these  shops  will  be  entirely  self- 
supporting.  The  conclusion  of  the  matter  is,  that,  whUe 
"  it  is  not  to  be  thought  that  a  revolution  is  at  hand  in 
respect  to  the  amelioration  of  the  condition  of  the  blind. 
.  .  .  We  are  able  to  see  brighter  prospects  ahead.  In  the 
end,  we  must  believe,  every  means  wiU  be  taken  to  keep 
any  human  being  from  saSering  blindness;  and  for  the 
blind  that  are  among  us,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  load  is 
made  less  heavy,  so  far  as  it  may  be  given  ns  so  to  do.  .  .  . 
Oar  message  is,  then,  after  all,  one  of  hope  "  (pp.  739, 740). 

Thb  Washington  Manuscbipt  op  thb  Epittles  op  Paul. 
(The  New  Testament  Manuscripts  in  the  Freer  Collec- 
tion. Part  II.)  By  Hbnbt  A,  Sanders,  University  of 
Michigan.  4to.  Pp.  251-315.  New  York :  The  Macmillan 
Company.    1918.    $1.25,  net. 

The  manuscript  here  described  is  given  the  symbol  "  I " 
by  Gregory  in  his  list  of  New  Testament  MSB.  It  is  one 
of  four  manuscripts  purchased  by  Mr.  Freer,  from  an  Arab 
dealer,  in  1906.  The  fragment  was  in  an  almost  hopelessly 
decayed  condition  when  found,  as  shown  iu  the  accompany- 
ing photograph,  and  no  value  was  put  upon  it  either  by 
the  Arab  or  by  Mr.  Freer,  and  it  was  thrown  into  the  bar- 
gain simply  because  of  its  association  with  the  other  man- 
oscripts.  With  much  difficulty  the  leaves  were  finally  sep- 
arated; and  they  proved  to  lie  a  practical  completion  of 
the  Freer  Manuscript,  covering  the  Epistles  of  Paul.  The 
manuscripts  were  probably  written,  according  to  Dr.  San- 


dlyGOOt^lC 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  PubUcatiom  493 

ders,  in  Egypt  in  the  aixth  century;  and  it  is  noticeable 
that  HebrewB  ia  placed  before  the  EpiBtles  to  Timothy  and 
Titna.  The  manuscript  originally  contained  a  little  orer 
two  hundred  leaves,  of  which  only  eighty-four  remain  with 
legible  writing,  which  begins  at  1  Cor.  x.  29. 

The  writing  is  in  uncial  letters  and  in  one  column  on  a 
page.  The  text  is  in  notable  agreement  with  the  Alexan- 
drian MSS.  Four  hundred  and  fifty  variants  with  Tiach- 
endorf's  edition  are  noted.  Of  these,  aixty-aeveu  are  pure 
Alexandrian  readings ;  while  there  are  but  five  pure  West- 
em  readings,  though  they  are  noteworthy.  Fifteen  timea 
it  agrees  with  the  Syriac  alone.  Evidently  the  readings 
are  those  current  primarily  in  Egypt  In  its  freedom  from 
Western  readings  it  is  superior  to  either  Aleph  or  B,  which 
will  lose  some  of  their  commanding  position  and  their 
younger  allies  will  gain.  The  volume,  in  addition  to  the 
preliminary  discussion,  has  three  facsimile  plates  and  the 
entire  text,  thus  mailing  a  very  important  addition  to  our 
critical  material. 

Ths  Synoptic  Gosi-els  and  thb  Book  of  Acts.  (Biblical 
Introduction  Series.)  By  D.  A.  Hater,  Professor  of 
New  Testament  Interpretation  in  the  Graduate  School 
of  Theology,  Garrett  Biblical  Institute.  8vo,  l*p.  351. 
New  Yorli:  The  Methodist  Etooli  Concern.  1919.  »2.00, 
net. 

It  is  refreshing  to  find,  as  we  do  in  this  volume,  the  evi- 
dence so  clearly  set  forth  which  establishes  confideiice  in 
the  historic  trustworthiness  of  the  Synoptic  Gospels  and 
of  the  Book  of  Acts.  The  book  is  specially  successful  in 
bringing  out  the  personality  of  the  various  writers.  In 
accordance  with  the  latest  criticism,  he  dates  the  Book  of 
Matthew  several  years  before  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem, 
the  Book  of  Mark  still  earlier,  and  gives  his  preference  to 
the  opinion  that  both  Luke  and  Acts  were  written  before 
the  martyrdom  of  St,  Paul,  and  gives  his  assent  to  I>r.  J. 
Bendel  Harris's  conclusion  that — 

"  Thanks  to  the  acuteness  of  Ramsay's  archaeological  and 
historical  criticism,  taken  along  with  the  linguistic  re- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


494  Bibtiotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

searches  of  Hawkins,  the  studies  in  medical  language  of 
Hobart,  and,  finally,  the  weighty  and  apparently  unanawer- 
able  criticisma  of  Hamack  (himself  a  convert  from  Tery 
different  views  of  the  composition  of  the  Lucan  writings), 
we  are  able  to  affirm  Luke's  rights  over  the  works  com- 
monly attributed  to  him  with  an  emphasis  that  has  prob- 
ably not  been  laid  upon  them  since  their  first  pnblication  " 
(p.  333). 

Sebhonb  on  thd  International  Uniforh  Sdndat-School 
Lessons  for  1920.  By  the  Monday  Club.  Forty-fifth 
Series.  12mo.  Pp.  ix,  337.  Boston :  The  Pilgrim  Press. 
1919.    11.50. 

This  volume  amply  sustains  the  high  character  of  the 
entire  series.  Thirty-one  different  Congregational  clergy^ 
men  have  contributed  to  the  interpretation  of  the  Sun- 
day-school lessons  for  the  coming  year,  four  of  them  being 
original  members  of  the  Club.  The  list  includes  Drs. 
William  E.  Barton,  Nebemiah  Boynton,  William  R.  Camp- 
bell, Francis  E.  Clark,  Albert  E.  Dunning,  Charles  E.  Jef- 
ferson, Edward  M.  Noyes,  and  G.  Frederick  Wright.  We 
repeat  that  tbere  is  no  better  method  of  expounding  the 
Sunday-school  lessons  than  that  of  the  preacher  from  the 
pulpit. 

Tun  Acts,  an  Exposition.  By  Chablss  R.  Ebdman,  Pro- 
fessor of  Practical  Theology,  Princeton  Theological  Sem- 
inary, Princeton,  New  Jersey;  author  of  "The  Gospel 
of  John,  an  Exposition,"  "  The  Gospel  of  Mark,"  "  The 
General  Epistles,"  "  Coming  to  the  Communion,"  "  Sun- 
day Afternoons  with  Railroad  Men,"  etc.  lOmo.  Pp. 
176.  Philadelphia:  The  Westminster  Press.  1919.  75 
cents,  net. 
A  scholarly,  popular,  compact,  and  trustworthy  treatise 

upon  this  important  t)ook. 

The  Prophets  in  the  Lioht  op  To-dat.  By  John  God- 
FEBT  HiLL^  Professor  of  Religions  Education  in  the  Uni- 
versity of  Southern  California.  Introduction  by  F.  M. 
Labein.  12mo.  Pp.  240.  New  York:  The  Abingdon 
Press.  1919.  fl.25,  net. 
A  brilliant  characterisation  of  the  various  Old  Teata- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publicationa  495 

ment  prophets,  dwelling  principally  upon  tlieir  ability  to 
interpret  the  moral  law  and  upon  the  consequences  of 
national  violations  of  its  principlee.  But  though  the  author 
does  not  deny  that  the  earlier  prophets  had  inspired  vis- 
ioDB  of  the  outcome  of  events  which  are  not  given  in  the 
spiritual  illuminations  that  are  vouchsafed  at  the  present 
time,  he  apparently  accepts  the  questionable  theories  of 
higher  criticism  concerning  the  date  and  authorship  of  the 
prophetical  books.  He  believes  in  a  "  Second  Isaiah  "  and 
in  the  late  date  of  the  Book  of  Daniel. 


Tub  Individdalistic  Gospel  and  Other  Essays.  By  Andhhw 
GiixiKS.  12mo.  Pp.  208.  New  York:  The  Methodist 
Book  Concern.     1919.    fl.OO,  net. 

This  is  preeminently  a  book  for  the  times.  Those  who 
read  recently  in  the  Bibuothbca  Sacba  the  author's  article 
on  "The  Need  of  a  New  Conception  of  God"  (pp.  143- 
151)  will  be  prepared  to  appreciate  every  one  of  the 
fourteen  papers  here  reproduced  from  various  recent  pnb- 
lications.  We  can  give  no  better  idea  of  the  work  than  by 
quoting  a  single  paragraph  from  the  chapter  entitled  "  If 
I  were  a  Young  Minister": — 

"  I  would  be  a  fool  to  discount  the  value  of  reforms  and 
leadership  in  them  as  a  constituent  part  of  the  minister's 
work,  but  I  would  be  a  bigger  fool  if  I  did  not  insist  that 
his  greatest  and  most  far-reaching  work  ia  the  leading  of 
individuals  into  the  life  as  it  is  in  Christ.  Get  men  soundly 
converted,  really  surrendered  to  God  and  transformed  by 
his  power,  and  you  can  trust  them  to  become  honest,  just, 
and  helpful  in  their  multifarious  relations  with  their  f^- 
low  men.  But  scamp  or  neglect  that  work,  ignore  conver- 
sion as  a  basic  element  in  world  salvation,  or  take  men 
into  the  church  while  they  are  still  trying  to  serve  two 
masters,  and  you  can  thunder  away  at  social  sins  and 
tinker  away  at  social  problems  until  doomsday  without 
achieving  any  lasting  results.  The  old  preacher  in  rural 
England  who  was  rebuked  because  the  total  definite  fruit 
of  one  year's  work  was  the  conversion  of  one  boy  really 
did  a  fair  year's  work  because  the  conversion  was  thorough 
and  the  boy  was  Bobert  Moffat "  (p.  65). 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


496  BibUotheca  Bacra  [Oct 

Catbchbtics  ;  or,  Theory  and  Practise  of  Religious  InstrQC- 
tion.  By  M.  Rbu,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Theology  at  Wart- 
bupg  Seminary,  Dubuque,  Iowa.  12mo.  Pp.  xi,  723. 
Chicago:  Wartbarg  Publishing  House.  1918. 
Id  the  preface  the  author  says  that  "  to  some  it  m^ht 
seem  as  if  this  Catechetice  were  too  bulky  to  serve  as  a 
textbook."  But  for  the  sake  of  adapting  it  to  needs  of 
pastors  and  catechists  who  have  stood  in  the  ministry  for 
years  it  was  important  to  make  it  full  and  comprehensive, 
even  to  adding  a  hundred  pages  of  matter  relating  to  the 
literature  of  the  subject,  and  illustrations  by  means  of 
practical  examples.  It  thus  becomes  a  work  of  general 
historical  as  well  as  of  practical  interest  to  the  adherents 
of  all  denominations.  One  is  interested  to  find  Isaac  Watts 
in  the  rdle  of  a  catechist,  preparing  his  juvenile  hymns 
under  the  title  of  "  Divine  and  Moral  Songs  for  the  Use 
of  Children."  "  On  account  of  their  childlike  simplicity  and 
warm  tone,  they  enjoyed  a  phenomenal  spread.  A  hun- 
dred editions  were  issued  until  1750.  .  .  .  80,000  to  100,000 
copies  on  an  average  were  printed  toward  the  end  of  the 
century"  (p.  17,8). 

Qborgb    Washington    the    Chbistian.     By    William    J. 

Johnson.     12mo.     Pp.  209.     New  York:  The  Abingdon 

Press.     1919.     $1.50,  net. 

In  this  volume  are  collected,  it  would  seem,  all  the  evi- 
dence bearing  upon  the  religious  character  of  the  Father 
of  our  Country.  It  cannot  fail  to  make  a  deep  impression 
and  remove  certain  misrepresentations  that  have  been  prev- 
alent. For  example,  the  report  is  widely  spread  that 
Washington  was  grossly  profane  on  two  occasions;  namely, 
after  the  battle  of  Monmouth  upon  hearing  of  the  failure 
of  General  Lee  to  attack  as  he  was  ordered ;  and,  secondly, 
upon  hearing  of  the  disaster  to  General  St.  Clair's  forces 
in  his  expedition  against  the  Indians  in  southwestern  Ohio. 
But  these  reports  are  baseless.  General  8t,  Clair's  defeat 
stunned  Washington  by  reason  of  its  uselessuess  and  great 
loss  of  soldiers;  and  in  the  heat  of  his  feeling  the  nearest 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  497 

to  profanity  that  he  came  was  to  burst  out  into  lamenta- 
tion in  which  occurs  the  expression,  "  O  Qod,  O  Qod,  he's 
worse  than  a  murderer  I  How  can  be  answer  it  to  his 
country?"  But  the  facts  are  that  Washiugton  scrupu- 
lously refrained  from  profanity  himself  and  repeatedly 
rebuked  his  soldiers  for  it,  and  in  general  bis  religious 
character  was  pronounced.  He  was  an  active  vestryman 
in  the  Episcopal  Church.  He  scrupulously  attended  church 
services  on  the  Sabbath,  wherever  he  was.  He  was  a  man 
of  habitual  prayer,  and,  as  we  know  by  his  constant  ex- 
pression, recognized  the  hand  of  Providence  in  all  his  suc- 
cesses. Truly  America  is  fortunate  in  having  such  an 
example  as  bis  set  before  its  successive  rising  generations. 

OuE  Immoetalitt.     By  I>.  P.  Rhodhs.     16mo.     Pp.  xiiii, 

310.     New  York :  The  Macmillan  Company.    1919.    |2.00, 

net. 

This  is  a  highly  philosophic  study  of  the  bearing  of  the 
belief  in  immortality  upon  the  discordant  life  of  man  upon 
the  earth.  It  is  not  altogether  a  heartening  study,  in  that 
it  leaves  us  so  far  from  the  goal  so  much  desired  by  a  strug- 
gling and  aspiring  world.  To  be  told  that  the  belief  in 
immortality  growing  out  of  our  imperfect  human  knowl- 
edge is  yet  elusive,  that  we  can  hardly  expect  in  the  near 
future  to  see  it  applied  with  any  degree  of  curative  power 
to  the  common  crimes  of  murder,  rape,  alcoholism,  as  well 
as  the  intricacies  of  family  and  political  life,  is  somewhat 
discouraging. 

This  book  is  by  no  means  easy  reading.  One  has  to  delve 
deep  to  find  its  real  significance.  Yet  dealing  with  one  of 
the  profoundest  subjects  of  human  interest,  and  brought 
to  bear  upon  the  most  vexing  problems,  one  is  forced  to 
seek  the  light  wbicb  it  essays  to  give. 

Ai/TBUisM :  Its  Nature  and  Varieties.     (The  Ely  Lectures 
for  1917-18.)    By  Ueobge  Hekbert  Palmbb.    lOmo.    Pp. 
viii,   138.    New  York:  Charles  Scribner's   Sons.     1919. 
}1.25,  net. 
Professor  Palmer  is  one  of  the  illuminating  writers  on 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


408  Bihliotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

moral  qnestions  whom  it  is  always  a  satisfaction  to  read. 
He  is  always  clear,  always  constructive,  and  he  usually 
arriTes.  In  this  volnme  he  discuBses  the  elements  of  al- 
truism which  are  finding  expression  in  society  to-day, 
rising  from  the  simplest  to  the  most  advanced  forms.  Man- 
ners is  a  very  simple  form  of  altruism,  but  it  shows  a  re- 
gard for  the  feelings  of  others.  Gifts  may  not  have  a  great 
significance,  especially  when  they  are  given  out  of  our 
abundance.  But  as  an  expression  of  interest  in  the  re- 
ceiver, a  gift  represents  a  somewhat  higher  form  of  altru- 
ism than  that  expressed  by  manners.  The  highest  form 
of  altruism,  of  course,  is  mutuality,  in  which  there  is  a 
reciprocal  factor,  tending  toward  the  highest  social  rela- 
tionship. 

It  is  encouraging  that  Professor  Palmer  finds  so  much 
of  the  highest  altruism  in  the  world,  of  which  the  passion 
for  justice  and  humanity  of  our  age  is  such  a  fine  illus- 
tration. 

Good  and   Evil:   A    Study   in    Biblical   Theology.     (The 
Paddock  Lectures  for  1917-18.)     By  Loben  W.  Batten, 
Ph.D.,  S.T.D.,  Professor  of  the  Literature  and  the  Inter- 
pretation of  the  Old  Testament  in  the  General  Theolog- 
ical Seminary  of  New  York.  16mo.  Pp.  224.    New  York ; 
Fleming  H.  Bevell  Company.    1919.    (1.25,  net. 
Professor  Batten  here  gathers  together  the  Old  Testa- 
ment   material   bearing    on    his    subject,    indicating    the 
sources  of  good  and  evil,  the  governing  principle,  the  prag- 
matic test,  the  distinction  between  pain  and  sin,  the  ten- 
dency towards  dualism,  and  the  deferred  rewards  and  pun- 
ishments.   As  an  inductive  study  it  sheds  much  light  on 
a  very  vital  subject. 

Tub  Dtnamitb  of  God.  By  Bishop  William  A.  Quayu. 
16mo.  Pp.  330.  New  York:  The  Methodist  Book  Con- 
cern.   1919.    11.50,  net. 

A  collection  of  twenty  sermons  by  one  of  the  strong 
preachers  of  the  Methodist  Church,  popular  in  character, 
practical  in  content,  and  adhering  largely  to  Biblical  ex- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Noticea  of  Recent  Publications  499 

position  of  a  coneervative  type.  One  must,  however,  add 
the  personality  of  Bishop  Quayle  to  the  printed  text  to 
anderetaDd  their  complete  eflectirenesa. 

Thb  Einodoh  that  Must  bb  Built.  By  Walter  J.  Cabby, 
M.A.,  R.N.  16mo.  Pp.  111.  New  York :  The  MacmiUan 
Company.    1919.    »1.00,  net. 

An  intensely  practical,  simple,  and  interesting  little 
book  explaining  the  character  and  the  content  of  the 
Christiau  life.  There  is  so  much  of  good  in  it,  so  much  of 
suggestlveQess,  that  it  is  a  genuine  matter  of  r^ret  to  note 
an  imperfection  in  the  cycle  of  elements  that  go  to  make 
op  the  Christian  life  and  the  coming  kingdom.  It  smacks 
more  of  the  ecclesiastical  than  of  the  social  side  of  relig- 
ion. As  such  it  will  hardly  provoke  the  reaction  which 
this  age  of  unrest  naturally  gives  to  the  discussion  of  the 
content  of  the  Christian  life.  While  the  social  import  of 
religion  is  fainted  at,  its  emplmsis  is  too  exclusively  upon 
the  old  individaalism. 

Thb  Collbob  Gateway.  By  Chablbs  Fbanklyn  Thwino, 
D.D.,  LL.D.,  Litt.D.,  President  of  Western  Reserve  Uni- 
versity. Second  Series  of  Baccalaureate  Discourses. 
lOmo.  Pp.  vii,  277.  Boston :  The  Pilgrim  Press.  1918. 
tl.50,  net. 
The  fifteen  baccalaureate  sermons  in  this  volume  include 

those  given  between  1903  and  1918,  and  naturally  represent 

a  wide  range  of  discussions  from  this  eminent  authority 

on  college  education. 

Fighting  fob  Faith  :  The  Justice  of  our  Fight ;  The 
Reasons  for  our  Faitb.  By  Qbobob  F.  Pbntbcost,  D.I>., 
Pastor  of  Bethany  Church,  Philadelphia ;  author  of  "  Out 
of  Egypt,"  "In  the  Volume  of  the  Book,"  etc.  12mo. 
Pp.  xiii,  290.  New  York:  George  H.  Doran  Company. 
1918.    fl.60,  net. 

It  is  to  be  expected  that  one  who  was  a  soldier  in  our 
Civil  War,  and  later  a  coworker  of  D,  L.  Moody  (who  said 
of  him,  "  He  is  the  ablest  evangelist  who  ever  crossed  my 
path  "),  should  be  impelled  to  speak  from  the  pulpit  bum- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


600  BibUotheca  Sacra  [Oct 

ing  words  concerning  the  lessons  of  the  late  European  var, 
and  eqnallj  impressive  words  concerning  the  foandations 
of  our  Christian  faitii.  Of  the  four  hundred  sermons  which 
he  preached  to  lai^  audiences  during  the  late  war,  six 
which  relate  to  the  war  are  collected  in  this  volume,  and 
four  relating  to  the  fundamentals  of  Christian  faith.  The 
seventh  sermon,  on  "  The  Fact  of  Christ,"  is  a  remarkably 
clear  and  convincing  presentation  of  the  historical  evi- 
dences establishing  the  fact  of  Christ's  life,  character,  and 
teachings.    The  volume  should  have  a  wide  reading. 

Studies  in  Mark's  Gospki-  By  Professor  A.  T.  Robbrt- 
SON,  M.A.,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  Chair  of  New  Testament  Inter- 
pretation, Southern  Baptist  Theological  Seminary,  Louis- 
ville, Ky.  16mo.  Pp.  ii,  146.  New  York :  The  Macmil- 
lan  Company.    1919.    |1.25. 

Dr.  Robertson  is  not  only  a  scholar  in  the  highest  sense 
of  the  word  but  is  a  popular  writer  of  the  first  quality. 
This  little  volume  must  therefore  commend  itself  to  all 
classes,  and  is  specially  valuable  for  its  defense  of  con- 
servative views.  As  an  illustration  we  have  this  concern- 
ing miracles:  "  No  one  to-day  talks  about  violation  of  the 
laws  of  nature  by  miracle.  We  ourselves  overcome  the  law 
of  gravity  by  climbing  and  now  by  flying  in  the  air,  but  the 
law  of  gravity  operates  all  the  time.  We  overcome  it  by 
force  of  will.  Surely  Ood  has  his  own  personal  will  at  all 
times,  and  is  himself  superior  to  all  the  laws  that  he  has 
laid  down  for  bis  universe"  (p.  51). 

The  Person    of  Christ  and  His  Preskncr  in  the  Lord's 

SiTppBB.     By  Jeremiah  Zimmerman,  D.t>.,  LL.D.     12mo. 

Pp.314.    Boston :  Richard  G.  Badger.     1919.    flM,  net. 

Dr.  Zimmerman  "  holds  with  the  Apostle  Paul  that  the 

Bread  which  we  break  in  the  Eucharist  is  the  communion  of 

the  Body  of  Christ.    Hence  he  l>elieves  in  the  Real  Eucha- 

ristic  Presence  of  the  glorified  boily  and  exalted  Christ  Jesus 

in  the  indivisible  unity  of  His  Divine-human  Person  in  the 

Holy  Communion,  but  he  rejects  consubstantiation."    After 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  Notices  of  Recent  Publications  501 

a  full  diacussioQ  of  the  trend  of  opinion  in  the  various  de- 
nominations he  is  led  to  believe  that  there  are  positive  in- 
dications that  "  the  tendency  of  Protestant  Churches  in 
Great  Britain,  is  toward  a  doctrine  more  in  harmony  with 
the  Lutheran,  and  that  when  once  they  understand  our  doc- 
trine they  wUl  find  it  altogether  acceptable"  (p.  199).  The 
adherents  of  all  denominations  will  find  the  volume  profit- 
able reading. 

Bolshevism  and  Social  Revoivt.  By  Danibl  Dobchbstbb, 
Js.  12mo.  Pp.  124.  New  York:  The  Abingdon  Press. 
1919.     75  cents,  net. 

Dr.  Dorchester  has  produced  in  this  little  volume  a  dis- 
cussion of  sociological  facts  and  conditions  which  is  worthy 
of  immediate  and  wide  circulation,  especially  among  the 
working  classes.  The  dangers  from  the  prevalence  of 
Bolshevism  cannot  be  overestimated. 

The  Unlvanitr  of  Chicago  PreM,  Chicago 

Matthew's  Sayings  of  Jesus:  The  Non-Markan  Common 
Source  of  Matthew  and  Luke.  By  Qborob  Dbwitt 
Castor,  Late  Professor  of  New  Testament  Literature  and 
Exegesis  in  the  Pacific  School  of  Religion.  12mo.  Pp. 
ix,  250.     $1.25,  net. 

National  Reform  Auoclatioo,  Pltuburgh 

Collapse  op  Christless  Civiuzations,  By  Richard  Cam- 
eron Wylie,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  author  of  "Our  Educational 
System:  Is  it  Christian  or  Secular?"  "Sabbath  Laws  in 
the  United  States,"  etc.  16mo.    Pp.  135.    1918.    50  cents. 

E.  P.  Dnttoo  and  Compaoy,  New  York 

The  Kingdom  op  the  Lovers  of  God.  By  Jan  Rutsbrobck, 
Prior  of  Grftnendal,  near  Brussels.  Now  translated  for 
the  first  time  from  the  Latin  of  Laurence  Surius,  the  Car- 
thusian, together  with  an  Introduction  by  T.  Arnolo 
Htdb.     12mo.    I'p.  xvi,  216.    1919.    J2.00,  net. 

The  Open  Court  Publishing  Company,  Chicago 

Letters  to  Teachers,  and  Other  Papers  of  the  Hour.  By 
Hartley  Bubr  Alexander,  Professor  of  I'hilosopby,  Uni- 
versity of  Nebraska.    8vo.    Pp.  vii,  253.    1919. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


602  Bibliotheca  Sacra 

PlcnUns  H.  ReveU  Company,  N«w  York 

Ood'b  Faith  in  Man  and  Other  Sennons.  B;  Pkkdbkics: 
F.  Shannon,  Pastor  ot  the  Reformed  Church-on-the- 
He^htB,  Brooklyn ;  author  of  "  The  Soul's  Atlas,"  "  The 
New  Personality,"  "  The  Enchanted  Uniyerse,"  "  The 
Breath  in  the  Winds,"  etc.  12mo.  Pp.  186.  1919.  fl.25, 
net. 

KsTNOTB  Studies  in  Kbtnotb  Books  of  the  Bible.  (The 
James  Spnint  Lectures  delivered  at  Union  Theological 
Seminary  in  Virginia.)  By  C.  Alphonso  Smith,  Ph.D., 
LL.D.,  L.H.D.,  Head  of  the  Department  of  English  in  the 
United  States  Naval  Academy,  Annapolis,  Md.,  and  author 
of  "  Studies  in  English  Syntax,"  "  Die  Amerikanische 
Literatnr,"  "  What  Can  Literature  Do  For  Me  ? " 
"  O.  Henry  Biography,"  etc.  12mo.  Pp.  202.  1919. 
f  1.25,  net. 

The  PaoDUCTiVE  Beliefs.  (The  Cole  Lectures  for  1919.) 
By  Ltnn  Habold  Hooch,  D.D.,  President  Northwestern 
University.    12mo.    Pp.  222.    1919.    ♦1.25,  net. 

The  Pllcrlm  Prew,  Bo«ton 

Childhood  and  Character:  An  Introduction  to  the  Study 
of  the  Religious  Life  of  Children.  (Manuals  of  Belig- 
ious  Education  for  Parents  and  Teachera.)  By  Hugh 
Habtshobne,  Assistant  Professor  of  Religious  Educa- 
tion in  The  Union  Theological  Seminary.  12mo.  Pp.  viii, 
282.    1919.    11.75. 

The  Abubnians  in  America.  By  M.  Vartan  Malcoh. 
With  an  Introduction  by  Hon.  James  W.  Obbard,  for- 
merly American  Ambassador  to  Oermany,  and  Preface  by 
LsoN  DouiNiAN.  12mo.  Pp.  xxvl,  142.  1919.  $1.50, 
net. 

Hanhall  Jonea  Compuiy,  BoMoo 

Can  Mankind  SuRvivBf  By  Morrison  L.  Swift.  12mo. 
Pp.  201.     1919.     fl.50,  net. 

The  Abingdon  Pr«M,  N«w  York 

Qermant's  Moral  Downfall:  The  Tragedy  of  Academic 
Materialism.  By  Alexander  W.  Crawford,  Professor 
of  English  in  the  University  of  Manitoba;  formerly  Fel- 
low in  Philosophy  in  Cornell  University.  12mo.  i'p. 
217.    1919.    f  1.00,  net. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Alter  the  Wai^-WhatT  361. 
AnsteT'B,  H.,  Bible  View  of  tbe 

World,    noUeed,   141. 
Antbonj'B,    A.     W.,    Coneclenca 

and  Concessions,  noticed,  26S. 
Atklns-B,   a    G.,   Oodword    Side 

of  UCe,  noUced,  140. 


Balley'B,  C.  S.,  Outdoor  Story 
Book,  noticed,  142. 

Barton,  G.  A.,  book  reviews  bj, 
485-190. 

Barton's,  J.  L.,  ChrlMlan  Ap- 
proach to  Islam,  noticed,  139. 

Bates,  W.  H.,  arUcle  by,  17«- 
192. 

Batten's.  L.  W.,  Good  and  Erll, 
noUced.  49S. 

Best-B,  H..  Blind,  noUced,  490- 
492. 

Books  HeceWed.  GOl. 

Boreham'B,  F.  W.,  Lu^Eage  of 
Life,  Silver  Shadow,  Golden 
Hlleetone,  FaceB  In  the  Fire. 
Mushrooms  on  the  Moor,  and 
Mountains  In  the  Mist,  no- 
Uced, 388. 


Campbell's.  J.  M.,  Second  Com- 
1ns  of  Christ.  noUced,  262. 

Carey'e,  W,  J.,  Elngdom  That 
Must  Be  Built,  noticed.  499. 

Christtan  Monasttclsm  and  Its 
Place  In  History,  article  on, 
by  I.  C.  Hannah,  105-118;  pre- 
Chrlstlan  monasUcIsm,  lOG; 
tour  periods  of  Christian  mo- 
nastlclBm,  106;  St.  Augustine 
of  Hippo,  106;  the  early  me- 
dlKval  period,  108;  the  monk 
an  educator,  109;  a  chron- 
icler and  statesman,  111; 
wealth  of  the  monasteries, 
115:    the  Jesuits.  117. 

Church.  The  Mlsalon  of  the. 
article  on,  by  N.  Wray.  312- 
322;  the  mission  of  the 
church  not  the  conversion  of 
the  world,  312;  hut  as  a  wit- 
Vol.  UCXVI.    No.  804.    8 


ness.  314;  the  klnsdom  not 
to  be  establlBtaed  by  the 
church,  316;  meaning  of  Acts 
XT.  13-18,  316;  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Jews,  317;  no 
kingdom  until  the  king  re- 
turns. 319;  the  visible  return 
of  Christ,  320;  meaning  of 
Rev.  111.  21,  321;  the  goal  of 
the  churCIi,  322. 

Clay's,  A.  T„  Empire  of  the 
Amorltes,  noticed.  4SG-487, 

Cope's,  H.  F.,  Religious  Educa- 
tion In  the  Church,  noticed, 
137. 

CHUcal  Notes,  119-132,  22S- 
249.  359-361,  46S-4S4. 

Crocker's,  J.  H.,  Winning  of 
RellglouB      Liberty,      noticed. 


Days,  The  Creative,  article  on, 
by  U  F.  Gruber,  391-414;  oc- 
casion of  conflict  between  sci- 
ence and  Revelation,  391; 
Revelation  as  a  source  of  In- 
formation, 392;  nature  as  a 
source  of  Information,  393: 
these  two  sources  comple- 
mentary, 393;  erroneous  atti- 
tudes of  science,  394;  of 
theology,  334;  purpose  and 
scope  of  Revelation,  396;  sci- 
ence and  theology  approach- 
ing truth  from  opposite  di- 
rections. 397;  account  of 
Genesis  meant  tor  all  ages, 
398;  the  language  of  Genesis 
phenomenal.  399;  all  lan- 
guage metaphorical,  399;  all 
knowledge  derived  through 
the  windows  of  the  sense- 
organs  only  partial,  400;  Gen. 
1.  1  treated  as  an  Introduction 
or  caption,  401:  as  an  ac- 
count of  the  creation  of 
the  elements,  402;  Its  "be- 
ginning" not  affected  by  pos- 
sible other  universes,  403; 
successive  creative  acts  and 
designs,     404;     creation    pro- 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Bihttotheoa  Sacra 


[Oct. 


GjaulTe,  iOS;  creation  by  a 
free  Personalftr.  406;  First 
Cauie  and  secondary  causes 
operative  In  creation.  407; 
cataclysms,  407;  creative  days 
not  ordinary  days,  407;  vari- 
ous uses  o(  the  word  "day," 
408;  to  the  eternal  God  no 
measured  time,  409;  argu- 
ment from  Sabbath  examined, 
410;  Qod's  Sabbath  vs.  man's, 
411;  creative  week  a  pat- 
tern for  all  possible  worldB, 
412;  the  "evwilng"  and  the 
"morning"  explained,  412; 
probable  length  of  creative 
days.  414. 

Deity.  The  Theory  of  a  Finite 
and  Developing,  note  on,  by 
F.  H.  Foster  and  L.  F.  Oru- 
ber,  125-132. 

Democracy,  What  is  a.  note  on, 
by  B.  C,  Qordon.  119-lZG. 

Dorchester's  D.,  BolsbevlBin  and 
Social  Revolt,  noticed,  601. 

Drown's,  E.  &..  God's  Responsi- 
bility for  the  War,  noticed, 
141. 


H.  G.,  War  and   the 

Bible,  noticed,  141. 
Erdman'B,  C.  R.,  Acts,  an  Ezpo- 

sttlon,  noticed.  494. 
Estes.    D,    F.,    article    by,   415- 

Ewing's,     W.,       Sunday-school 

Century,  noticed,  389. 
Exodus  Iv.  16,  note  on,  by  H.  M. 

Wiener,  234. 
Exodus  ivlli.  10  f..  The  Text  of, 

note    on,   by   H.    M.   Wiener, 

483-484. 
Exodus,  Notes  on  the,  by  B.  M. 

Wiener.  474-483. 
ExodUB,  The,  and  the  Conquest 

of  the  Negeb,  note  on,  by  H. 

M.  Wiener,  468-474. 


Foster.  F.  H..  note  by,  125-127. 

Fullerton's,    K..    Prophecy   and 

Authority,  noticed,  377-382. 


Oaal  Narrative  (Jud.  Ix.  36-41), 
The  Crltlctam  of  the,  note  on, 
by  H.  If.  ?nener,  359-361, 


Gardner's,  C.  S.,  Psychology  and 
Preaching,  noticed,  133-13B. 

German  Attitude  to  the  Bible, 
The,  article  on.  by  W.  H.  O. 
Thomas,  165-176;  extent  of 
German  influence,  165;  ths 
unity  of  the  Bible,  166;  Its 
universality,  167;  tta  reality. 
188;  Its  vitality.  169;  its 
slngutarity,  170;  Its  finality, 
171;  defects  of  the  German  In- 
tellect, 172. 

German  Moral  Abnonnallty,  ar- 
ticle on,  by  W.  B.  O.  Thomas. 
84-104;  military  policy  of 
Germany,  84;  acts  of  cruelty. 
86;  alleged  military  neeeesltj, 
88;  political  efforts,  90;  in- 
gratitude, 93;  the  reHglona 
leaders,  94;  lack  of  spiritual 
Insight,  97;  German  Biblical 
criticism,  102. 

GlUles,  A.,  arUcIe  by,  143-161. 

ainies-s.  A.,  Individualistic  Gos- 
pel, noticed.  496. 

God,  The  Need  of  a  New  Con- 
ception of,  article  on,  by  A. 
Omiea,  143-161;  Germany's 
apostasy,  143 ;  half-truths. 
144;  second  probation,  146; 
one  chance  better  than  many. 
147;  Christ's  revelation  of 
God,  149;  reasonableness  of 
future  punishment,  150;  God 
a  consuming  fire,  lEl. 

Gola,  T.,  note  by,  243-249. 

Gordon,  E.  C,  note  by.  119-126. 

Greek  Genesis,  The  Grof-WeU- 
hausen  Theory,  and  the  Con- 
servative Position,  The.  ar- 
ticle on.  by  H.  M.  Wiener, 
41-60;  Olmstead's  paper,  41. 
49;  Wiener  misunderstood,  43; 
the  conservative  standpoint, 
44;  WellhauBen's  position,  46; 
two  kinds  of  altar,  47;  sub- 
stantive law  and  procedure, 
48;  Gen.  xlv.,  62;  the  Samar- 
itan Pentateuch.  56. 

Orice's,  E.  M.,  Records  from 
Ur  and  Larsa  Dated  in  the 
Larsa  Dynasty,  noticed.  487; 
Chronology  of  the  I^rsa  Dy- 
nasty, noticed,  489. 

Gruber.  U  F.  note  by,  127-132; 
arucle  by,  391-414. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Hanuali.  I.  C,  ullcle  by,  106- 
118;   book  reTlew  by.  260-251. 

HutlngB's,  J.,  DlctionuT  of 
the  Apostolic  Cborch,  no- 
ticed, 263. 

Hayea'B.  D.  A..  Synoptic  Ooepele 
and  the  Book  of  Acti,  no- 
ticed, 49S. 

Heili^ngsbeweKuns,  Die,  article 
op,  by  B.  B.  Warfleld,  1-40; 
extent  of  tbe  Hovement  In 
Oennany,  1;  a  Oemaan  tree 
cburdi,  3;  Movement  deOned, 
4;  JuBtlflcation  of  the  More- 
ment,  6;  Pearsall  Smith's  in- 
flnenoe,  S;  fn  Oermaiiy,  11; 
German  coadjutors,  14;  a 
Higher  life  Hovement.  16; 
tbe  Pentecost  Uoveaient,  17; 
Perfectionist  teacbing;.  20; 
faith  healing,  27;   notes,  29. 

Hill's.  J.  a..  Prophets  tn  the 
Ught  of  To-day,  noticed.  494. 

Hopkins's,  E.  W.,  History  of 
Religions,   noticed,    260-261. 

Hun  and  the  Imprecatory 
Psaims.  The,  note  on,  by  W. 
A.  Jarrel,  228-232. 

Huntington  Palimpsest,  More 
from  the,  390. 


Lewis's,  F.  Q.,  How  the  Bible 
Grew,  noticed,  387. 

Life,  The  TletM-ious,  articles 
on,  by  W.  H.  O.  Thomas,  267- 
288.  466-467;  Dr.  Warfleld's 
articles,  267;  salvation  con- 
tinuous, not  complete,  368; 
Instantaneons  sanctifioatlon. 
268;  Methodism.  268.  279; 
separation  of  justification  and 
Banctffleatlw,  269;  Rom.  vl. 
14.  269;  meaning  of  sanctill- 
cation,  270;  faith  and  sancti- 
flcatlon.  270;  Rom.  t1.  6.  271; 
Rom.  Till.  1,  271;  detlveranee 
from  corruption,  272;  doctrine 
of  eradication,  274;  Rom.  Til. 
14-24.  27E;  the  two  natures, 
277;  the  Holy  Spirit,  277; 
Quietism.  278;  free-wtll.  279; 
Christ's  death  and  our  sancti- 
fleation.  280;  conscious  and 
unconsctouB  sins,  281;  perfeo- 
'  tlonism,  282;  Armlnlantsm. 
284;  PearsaU  Smith.  286;  the 
Keswick  teaching.  286;  Bishop 
of  Durham.  455;  Rev.  B.  H. 
Hopkins,  459;  Prebendary 
Webb-Peploe,  460;  conclusion. 
468. 


Jarre],  W.  A.,  note  by.  228-232. 

Jehovah,  article  on.  by  J.  D. 
Wilson,  221-227;  Jehovah  the 
world's  Redeemer,  221;  first 
use  of  the  word,  222;  de- 
generacy of  the  race,  224; 
God  accepts  the  name,  226: 
delay  In  tbe  coming  of  the 
Promised  One,  226. 

Johnson's.  W.  J.,  Washington 
the  Christian,  noticed.  496. 


Kelser's,  C.  E.,  Selected  Tem- 
ple Documents  of  the  Ur  Dy> 
nasty,  noticed.  487;  Patesis  ctf 
tbe  Ur  Dynasty,  noticed.  489. 

Keyser's.  U  F..  System  of  Gen- 
eral Ethics,   noticed,   388-386. 

Enudaon'a.  A.  C,  Religious 
Teaching  of  tbe  Old  Testa- 
ment, noticed.   257-260. 

Kyle.  M.  G.,  book  review  by, 
362-376. 


HcClenahan,  D.  A.,  article  by. 
289-311. 

Hackenna's.  R.  W..  Adventure 
of  Life,  noticed,  387. 

Magoun,  H.  W..  article  by.  61- 
83. 

Merrill's,  W.  P.,  Christian  In- 
ternationalism,  notified.   141. 

Mills's.  P.  L..  Prehistoric  Re- 
ligion, noUced.  262. 

Monday  Club.  Sermons  on  the 
International  Sunday-School 
Lessons  for  1919,  noticed, 
139;   for  1920,  noticed,  494. 

Moore's.  G.  F..  History  of  Re- 
ligions, noticed.   382. 

Morgan's,  W.,  Religion  and  The- 
ology of  Paul,  noticed.  261. 

Hoses,  The  Religion  of.  article 
on.  by  H.  M.  Wiener.  828- 
S5S;  date  of  the  Exodus.  323; 
monotheism   in   Egypt   before 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


Bihliotheca  Sacra 


[Oct 


the  time  ol  Hosee.  326;  teacb- 
Ing  of  Akhenaton,  326;  com- 
pared with  Ps.  cfv.,  327;  later 
Egyptian  monotbelsm,  331; 
the  Syrian  Baal,  332;  a  PhcB- 
nlclan  god  Bethel,  333;  the 
EHephantlne  erldence,  337;  the 
Tetracrammaton  probably  In- 
trodaced  b7  Mooee.  3S9;  not 
derived  from  the  Mldlan- 
Ites.  340;  confuBloa  between 
the  Tetragrammaton  and  the 
Adonai,  341;  use  of  "Baal" 
Id  the  time  of  Hoaea.  iU; 
emendations  of  the  M.  T.,  346; 
the  use  of  BJaliim,  348;  mon- 
othelem  not  prevalent  In 
Babylonfa,  349;  nncertalnty 
whether  the  patrtarchti  had 
attained  to  fall  monotheism, 
360;  etymology  of  the  Tetra- 
grammaton. 352;  conversion 
of  the  Hebrews  to  monothe- 
ism, 364;  the  monotheism  of 
the  Pentateuch,  367. 

N 
Navllle  OD  the  Composition  and 

Sources  of  Genesis,   note  on, 

by  J.  R.  Wlghtman.  234-243. 
Notices  of  Recent  Publications. 

133-142,       250-266,      362-390, 

486-602. 


Palmer's.  O.  H.,  Altruism,  no- 
ticed. 497. 

Papazlan'B,  B.  S.,  Tragedy  of 
Armenia,  noticed,  389. 

Pentateuch,  Contributions  to  a 
New  Theory  of  the  Composi- 
tion of  the,  article  on,  by  H, 
M.  Wiener,  193-220;  Samari- 
tan additions,  194;  Num.  zzl. 
13,  194;  characteristic  modl- 
fl cations,  196;  the  place  of 
Aaron's  death.  197;  text  of 
Dent.  X.  6f..  199;  Itinerary 
of  Num.  zxxtll..  200;  larger 
Cambridge  Septuaglnt.  206: 
uncertain  text  of  numbers, 
206:  Influence  on  the  text  of 
the  Divine  commands,  209; 
piercing  of  the  slave's  ear. 
211;  early  use  of  the  word 
"baalim,"  212;  its  excision, 
313;  places  and  kinds  of  sac- 


rifice, 214;  erron  of  the  U. 
T.,  216;  apparent  contradic- 
tions between  Deuteronomy 
and  Eixodua,  217;  help  from 
the  LXX,   219. 

Pentecost's.  G,  P.,  Fluting  for 
EUth,  noticed,  499. 

Phelps's,  W.  L..  Reading  the 
Bible,  noticed,   386. 

Pre-  and  FoB^mlllenar]anB,  The 
Fundamental  Dltter^iceB  be- 
tween, article  on,  hy  D.  A. 
UcClenahan,  2S9-311;  what 
the  fundamental  differences 
are  not,  289;  two  fundamental 
differences,  290;  the  premll- 
lenarlan  view,  291;  temporal 
and  carnal  character  of  the 
kingdom,  293;  testimony  of 
premlUenarlana  on  this  point, 
296;  belief  of  poBtmlllenarians, 
297;  Christ's  plan,  298;  Inter- 
pretaUon  of  Matt,  xxvlll.  18- 
20,  800;  the  gospel  preached 
not  merely  as  a  witness,  301; 
parable  of  the  tares,  and  cut 
the  drawnet,  303;  foreign 
missions,  304;  minimizing  the 
gospel,  308;  practice  of  pre- 
mlllenarians  better  than  their 
theory,  310. 

Priest— Priesthood,  article  on, 
by  W.  H.  Bates.  178-192; 
"priest"  defined,  176;  priest- 
hood universal,  176;  lim- 
ited, 176;  universal  again, 
177;  no  "priests"  in  the  New 
Testament  church,  177;  true 
origin  of  the  Roman  Catho- 
lic priesthood.  17S;  priett- 
bellever  truths  reasserted. 
ISl;  the  truth  perverted,  182; 
"  priesthood  "  exempllfled— 
the  "priest"  at  work.  183; 
the  "mass"  established,  183; 
Its  blasphemous  claims  de- 
noted and  challenged,  183; 
and  disproved,  185;  the  of- 
fices of  priest  and  prophet 
discriminated  and  explicated, 
188:  Romanists  vs.  Protest- 
ants <»  re  civic  weltare,  191; 
especially  In  r^ard  to  the 
temperance  cause.  .192;  no 
place  for  the  Roman  priest- 
hood In  the  Church  of  Christ, 
192. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


1919]  In> 

Frotalbltion,  Tbe  PhlloBoplir  At, 
article  on,  by  C.  W.  Super, 
434-454;  three  modem  re- 
forma,  434;  beginnings  ot  the 
temperance  reform,  435;  11m- 
lU  of  personal  Ubertr,  436; 
rule  of  the  majority,  437; 
paternal  authority,  439;  gov- 
enunent  by  law,  440;  doctrine 
of  expediency,  441;  Hetlio- 
dleta  and  temperance,  442; 
influence  of  the  Wealflya, 
444;  total  abaUnence,  445; 
temperance  Bocietlea  la  Am- 
erica, 446;  origin  of  the  Anti- 
Saloon  League,  448;  rapidity 
of  the  prohibition  movement, 
449;  opposition  of  the  Ger- 
man, element.  460;  total  ab- 
stinence In  the  army,  462; 
attitude  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment toward  political  re- 
forms, 4G3. 


Rankin's,  I.  O.,  Prayers  and 
ThanksglTlngB  for  a  Chris- 
tian, noUced,  389. 

Reu's,  M.,  Catechetlea,  noticed, 
496. 

Rhodes'B,  D.  P.,  Onr  Immortal- 
ity, noticed.  497. 

RobertBon'a,  A.  T..  New  Clti- 
zenshlp,  noticed,  388;  Studies 
in  Mark's  Oospel.  noticed,  SOO. 


Sanders's.  H.  A.,  Washington 
HanUBCript  of  the  Epistles  of 
Paul,  noticed,  492. 

Schenck's,  F.  S..  Apostles'  Creed 
In  the  Twentieth  Century, 
noticed.  265. 

Shannon's,  F.  F.,  Breath  In  the 
Winds,  noticed,  140. 

Sin  In  the  Light  of  To4&y,  ar- 
ticle on.  by  O.  M.  Winchester, 
152-164;  need  of  conserva- 
tism. 162;  the  evolatlonary 
view.  163;  sin  and  the  sensu- 
ous nature,  154;  sin  as  aelt- 
Isbness,  1S6;  Finney's  defini- 
tion,   166;    sin    a   tragic    ele- 


ment, 157;  Kant's  definition, 
158;  incentives  to  Bin,  169; 
manifestations  of  Bin,  160; 
Christ's  teaching,  161;  sin 
differentiated  from  ignorance, 
162;  Bin  and  guilt.  163. 

Smith's,  O.  A,,  Book  of  Deuter- 
onomy,   noticed,   362-376. 

Soowden's,  J.  H.,  Coming  of  the 
Lord,  noticed,  262. 

"Split  Infinitive"  and  Other  Id- 
ioms, The.  article  on,  by  H. 
W.  Hagoun.  61-83;  American 
fads,  SI;  Governor  Long's  po- 
sition, 62;  English  has  but 
two  tenaes,  63:  allowable  Id- 
ioms, 66;  narrow  viewpoint, 
68;  the  preposition  "to."  71, 
79;  Bpecimens  of  wrong  us- 
age, 73;  flexibility  of  Eng- 
lish. 74;  German  usage,  77; 
authors  who  use  the  "aplit 
inflsltive,"  79;  language  a 
tool,  83. 

Super,  C.  W.,  article  by,  434- 
464. 

Super's,  C.  W.,  Pan-PruBsian- 
Ism,  noticed,  266. 

Swete'B,  H.  B.,  Essays  on  tlie 
Early  Hlatory  of  the  Church 
and  the  Mlnletry,  noticed, 
353-267. 


Text  of  Num.  xxl.  14  f..  The, 
note  on,  by  H.  H.  Wiener, 
232-234. 

The  Pulpit  in  War  Time,  no- 
ticed, 141. 

"  The  Student's  Theodore," 
note  on,  by  Y,  Oola,  243-249. 

Thomas,  W.  H.  Q.,  articles  by. 
84-104,  165-175,  267-288.  455- 
467;  book  review  by,  253-267. 

Thomas's,  J.  B.,  Religion,  no- 
ticed, 135-137. 

Thwing'B.  C.  F.,  College  Gate- 
way, noticed,  499. 

Transcendence.  The  Divine,  ar- 
ticle on,  by  D.  F.  Bstee.  415- 
433;  the  Divine  tranacan- 
dence.  415;  immanence  not 
the  whole  truth,  416;  deflnl- 
tlona  of  transcendence,  417; 
faith  always  Involved  In  our 
conceptions  of  Qod.  418;  Di- 
vine   transcendence    may    be 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


BUiUotheoa  Sacra 


istemd  trom  analogy,  419; 
is  tbe  verdict  ol  conaclence, 
420;  Is  r«Qdered  [irobable  by 
its  geoeral  prevBlencfl,  420; 
Invoiced  In  the  concepUtn  of 
peraonalltr,  421;  ImDlied  In 
tb«  Dlylne  acUvlUes,  422;  and 
Involved  In  communion  irtth 
Ood,  428;  the  sense  of  sin  de- 
pends upon  It,  424;  ethics  re- 
quires it,  427;  tb»  Christian 
rellKion  demands  it  as  a 
basis  of  forgiveness,  428;  of 
Ood's  love.  439;  also  of  our 
faith  and  love,  429;  and  of 
prayer,  430;  It  is  Involved  In 
the  Incarnation,  430;  In  the 
Indwelling  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
431;  and  Is  essential  to  the 
"BeatiQc  Vision,"  132. 


Weddell,  J.  W.,  book  revtov  by, 

38G. 
Wtenw.     H.     U.,     articles     by, 

41-60,        198-220,        322-368; 

notes    by,    232-234.    86»-8<l; 

book  rsvlew  by.  367-260. 
Whltt»k«r'a,  T.,  Nao-Platonlats, 

notic«d,  S7&-377. 
Wlgfatman.  J.  R.,  noU  by,  »4- 


243. 
WUldDBon's,  W.  C,  Conoemlng 

Jesus  Christ,  notloed,  38E. 
Wilson,  J.   D.,   article   by,  221- 

227. 
Wilson's,      L.      B.,     America  ~ 

Here    and    Over    There,    uo- 

Uced.  141. 
Wlncheater,   O.   H.,   utlcle   by, 

152-164. 
With  Ood  In  tbe  War,  noUced, 

140. 
Wray,  N.,  article  by,  312-832. 


Warflrtd,  B.  B.,  article  by,  1- 


Zlmmemtan's,  J..  Person  of 
Christ  and  His  Preaence  In 
the    Lord's    Suppw,    notloed. 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


T'Je  Bible  Champion 

Is  the  OfBclal  Orgaji  of  the  Bible  League  of 
North  America,  an  organization  formed  to  pro- 
mote a  true  knowledge  of  the  Bible  and  conse- 
quent Faith  tn  its  Divine  Authenticity. 


As  Its  name  Indicates,  the  BIBLE  CHAMPION  etttafle  tor  the  Book  ae  the 
Word  of  God.  It  Is  an  armor]'  of  assault  and  defense  th^t  will  furnish  weapons 
to  put  to  an  end  the  calumnies  and  misrepresentations  of  the  enemies  of  the 
Divine  Truth. 

The  BIBLE  CHAMPION  Is  Indispensable  to  the  Student,  the  Teacher,  and 
the  Preacher,  who  would  keep  abreast  of  the  times  In  Biblical  knowledge. 

The  BIBLE  CHAMPION  contains,  each  month,  contributions  from  the  fore- 
most conservative  scholars  on  both  sides  of  the  Atlantic.  Also,  each  issue  con- 
tains valuable  contributions  from  several  or  all  of  these  sU  eminent  scholars, 
the  Editors  of  the  Bible  Champion. 

JAY  BENSON  HAMILTON.  D,D.,  Gen.  Sec  Bible  League  of  N.  A. 

DAVID  JAMES  BURRBLL.  D.D.,  LL.D. 

LUTHER  T.  TOWNSEND.  D.D.,  LL.D. 

WILLIAM  H.  BATES,  D.D. 

HERBERT  W.  MAGOUN.  Ph.D. 

Q.  FREDERICK  WRIGHT.  D.D.,  LL.D. 

Dr.  Townsend's  series  of  articles  which  attracted  such  wide  attention,  en- 
titled; "Prehistoric  Peoples  in  Europe  and  America;  their  bearlns  upon  the 
Theory  of  Evolution,"  began  in  the  October,  1918.  number.  Those  who  miss 
reading  these  articles  miss  more  than  they  are  conaclous  of! 

PRICE,  $1.S0  the  Year;  Canada,  $1.65;  Foreign,  41.75. 

-THREE  MONTHS  for  25  cento  — from  October 


SPECIAL  OFFER  for  a  Yearly  Subscription.  — With  a  subscrlpUon  for  one 
year  we  will  send  FREE,  as  a  Premium,  Ei  copies  of  the  Sermonizer  (now  con- 
solidated with  Bible  Champion).    A  Valuable  Magazine  for  Bible  Students. 

A  Year's  subscription  to  Bible  Champion  constitutes  Bible  League  Member- 
ship without  further  expense.    Make  all  money  orders  or  drafts  payable  to 

FRANK  J.  BOYER,  Publisher 

READING,  PA. 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


(IN  PRESS) 


Moses  and  the  Monuments 


C  Light  from  Archeology  on  Pentateuchal 
Times.  Lectures  on  the  Stone  Foundation, 
Princeton  Theolo^cal  Seminary.  By  Melvin 
Grove  Kyle,  D.D.,  Professor  of  Biblical  Theol- 
ogy and.  Biblical  Archsology,  Xenia  Theolog- 
ical Seminary,  Ohio;  Archsological  editor  of 
the  Sunday  School  Times;  associate  editor  of 
BibUotheca  Sacra.  About  300  pp.,  20  illustra- 
tions, 12mo.  $2.00,  net.  To  all  penons  or- 
dering the  book  before  Jan.  1,  1920,  we  will 
lend  it  for  SL65,  postpaid.         ^       .    ^  i 


D.qit.zeaOvGoOt^lc 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


MBlGoOl 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le 


D.qil.zMBlG001^le