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