The sun. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1833-1916, 1892-12-10
The Authority Of the Blblc.


The Rev. DR.. BIRCH contcnded in his
argument against Dr. BRIGGS that tho
Presbyterian doctrine and belief are that
the Bible Is GODS book, that COP was the
thinker OF the thought. the arranger OF the
clauses. the spcller OF the words, and thut
hence the text itself Is divine.
Undoubtedly that Ia the belief In which
every member OF the Presbytery trying
DR.. BRIGGS was brought UP, IL he was
reared In the orthodox Protestant faith.
DR.. BnIaGs himself was taught that doc
trine in the Sunday school. He learned 1t
at his mothers knee. and probably when he
received his ordination az o Presbyterian
minister he still adhered to it. Refusal to
believe in tho absolute perfection OF the
Bible as the infallible Word of GOD has been
until recent years indubtahe evidence
OF fatal infldelity In orthodox estima-
ton. Instead OF weakening. this BELIEF
had grown stronger from the time OF the
Reformation. Without such Bible. Prot
estantism felt that it had nothing to stand
on. 1t required Divine authority and an
absolute standard OF truth. which 1t could
get nowhere else than in the Scriptures.
for it had It's origin In u revolt against the
authority OF tho Church over tho con-
sciences OF men.
Il, then, tho Bible Is fallible. and 1t re-
cords the traditions Of men rather than the
Word Of COP. ii it Is marked by the errors
and deficiencies inseparable from oil human
productions. what has Professionalism to
rest on as supernatural and absolute au-
thority? 1t has no other foundation than
the uncertainty of tho human reason.
Hence Dr.. BRIGGS has attacked oil ortho-
dox Professionalism aud not merely the
Presbyterian Church, and adroitly as he
may defend himself with the weapons OF
tho subtle theologlan. the public under
stand that that is the offence for which he
is on trial. Protestant orthodoxy. or evan
gelicaism. as 1t Is called. Is battling for Its
life. 1t is contendlng for the preservation
Of tho only authority by which 1t holds
sway over the conscienccs Of millions Of
earnest believers.
The Rev. DR.. birch. however. got on very
dangerous ground when he contended that
the teaching Of DR.. BRIGGS that MOSES was
not tho author Of the Pentateuch is itself
destructive of the Christian faith. IF
MOSES did not write the Pentateuch." he
exclaimed, mo Jew can be blamed for re-
tecting JESUS CHRIST" "CHR1sT refers
to the Mosaic authorship twenty-four
times" and II He was ignorant as to
the subject I'VE cannot trust . single
promise Of the Gospel" DR.. BIRCH
must not forget that DR.. BRIGGS has
on his side the preponderance Of modern
Biblical scholarship when he rejects MOSES
as the author Of the Pentateuch. and that he
can fortify his position with an array Of
evidence which his accusers will find 1t hard
to dispute. There he Is strongest. and he
can smile at his accusers. for they can only
talk loosely while he can answer precisely.
1t is a question OF fact seemingly capable Of
demonstration after method scientific in
character. II the faith In the Bible had
nothing else to rest upon than proof Of tho
Mosaic authorship Of the Pentateuch. Its
| foundation would be altogether frail. &C
| cording to the recent Investigations and
conclusions OF philology and Biblical scholar.
ship. II belief in the Gospel is dependent
on belief that MOSES wrote the first five
books Of the Old Testament. the basis OF
Christianity is very shaky.
Any attempt to convict DR.. BRIGGS which
goes beyond the simple issue whether his
doctrine Is consistent with the Westmin-
ster Confessions declaration OF the per.
lection OF the Scriptures generally will
bring his prosecutors to grief. After he
has been pronounced heretical according tc
the existing standard. the question whethe,
he is heretical because his own doctrine Ii
true and the doctrine of the standard
faulty can come up for independent con
sideration. 1t must come up however the
verdict may be.
The issue ia whether the Bible Is to stanC
or to fall; whether it Is to remain as the
sole fountain OF absolute religious truth
or is to be treated as book criticisable fol
its imperfectons. deficiencies. errors. falla.
cies, and other human limitations.