The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1890-06-29

senucnt averment that Z" II We believe that the
law, as II grew. really did REPRESENT tho divine
| intention for tho Jews, gradually worked out
upon tho basis OF n Mosaic institution. there Is
! nothing materially untruthtul, though there Ia
something uncrltical In nttrIbntinR the whole
| Legislation to Moses, acting under tho d.
vine command" II acoms to us that 1t
really makes n Rront deal Of difference
whether n given piece CT Hebrew leRisln-
ton was In TACT promulgated by Moses
acting under the divine command or
merely commends iisclf 10 an Oxford pro-
fossor, ns conformod in his opinion to the
divine intention. In the case OF such COM
position rs tho hook OF Daniel, Mr.. Gore secs
the necessity OF maintaining sharp distinc-
ton between n piouB fraud. which cannot DO
regarded ~ inspired, md nm idealiztnp per-
sonincation which. IN his judgment. can DO. He
contends that tho Church leaves opon to liter
airy criticism the question whether several OF
tho writings OF tho Old Testament Including
not OILY tho look OF job. and tho Song OF
Solomon. but also tho Books Of Jonah and
DnnieD should lie looked upon rs historical. or
~ dramatic. Mr. Gore knows that he Is ask
Ing tho reader TO mako considerable changes
IN tho literary conception OF tho Scriptures
but no snys tho changes are not Erentor than
were involved in the acceptance OF the holio-
centric astronomy. Some OF the changes are
indicated, not a(llrmativoly, but interroga-
lively; they are hinted rather than avowed:
for instance; does tho jewish history, asks the
author OF this essay, pass back out OF history
into myth In particular. are not its earlier
narratives before the fall OF Abraham OF the
nature OF myth. In which we cannot distinguish
the historical germ. though We do not at oil
deny that 1t eXists1"
Mr. Cores patrlstio scholarship has enabled
him to verify. by some Interesting quo.
tations tho assertion that tho Church
the mems the Church "a whole is
not restrained from accepting the results
OF historical criticism by having COM
mittcd herself to my doRmatio definitions OF
the meaning OF inspiration. 1T Is" the author
says. remarkable that OriGen's almost reck-
loss mysticism. and his accompanying re-
pudiation OF the historical character OF
largo parts OF tho Old Testament and
OF some parts OF the New. though they
did not gain acceptance. on tho other hand
never reused tho Church to contrary defni- |
tlons Nor was It OrlGen only who disputed
the historical character OF parts OF the nara
tive OF Holy Scripture. Clement, before him.
in Alexandria. and the medieval Anselm, In |
tho west treat the seven days creation as all
leGory. and not history. Athsnasius speaks OF
Paradise as a agure:' medieval Greek
writer, who had more OF IrenTus than remains
to us, declared that he did not know how
those who kept to the letter, and took the ac
count OF the temptation historically rather than |
could meet the arguments OF |
Iren,rus against them. The Church. |
then, IL not tied by any existing definitions. |
We cannot make any exact claim upon any |
ones belief In regard TO inspiration. simply |
because We have no authoritative definition to |
bring to bear upon him"