The Helena independent., 1893-02-23

In Connection With the Challenge From
Rev. Clark Braden.
To The independent:
The card to which Mr.. Clark Braden re-
fers in the public challenge with which he
honors me in your column is as follows:
Conclusions of Biblical science now gem
orally accepted: That the Pentsteuch is
nom Mosaic a slowly built compilation
from documents, all ages later than David
and Solomon, and finally finished in its
present shape about 444 B. c.; that the
Psalter is non-Davdic and comp osite COM
piled from small collections of HYMNS
written as a rule after the exile, from 500
Is. G.. to 100 b. c.; that the Book of Isaiah
is cluster of W itlngs f ON more than
half dozen authors, distributed over period
of two centuries; that the prophecy of DAME.
was written about 1G5 b. G., and contains
no prediction that ever WAS or ever can be
fulfilled; that the first three gospels, not
the ork of eye witnesses, are slowly gath
cred aa9reRatlons of memories of Jesus
teaching and career, precious but not infal-
lible; that the Fourth gospel. not by the
apostle John, is doRmatic treatise about
Jesus, and it ia not in all respects accurate
history; that the text of the Bible is imper-
feet, having suffered the msfortunes COM
mon TO all ancient writings; that the canon
Ol Eue DIDO Wha bullb by human usage,
! slowly and with great uncertainties, every
| writing had existed first as simple litera-
ture and was finally included in the list of
| scriptures by common consent"
| %. Tho single question here involved is
whether the hundred or more great stud
ents, who by common consent, constitute
tho world of Biblical scholarship to-day
do really occupy the positions here indi-
Gated. No debate ls needed to settle this,
for one familiar with the position of these
eminent authors and professors in univer &
itas in America and Europe is aware tha.
the above statements. in the main, simply
represent what Is common knowledQe.
(2j. Certainly the question here involved
the rositon and tendency of prssen.
biblical sclencs-cannot be settled by set.
ting aside, as Mr. Braden demands. every
thing written since the fourth century. Ny
card does not refer to the fourth but to tn,
, nineteenth century. Moreover, to discuss
any biblical problem upon the basis of al
eIcluslon OF everything mora recent thar
the fou tn century would be as ridiculous
as to rule out every thing written on naturs
, history since Aristotle while discussing tbs
doctrine of evolution.
, t3J. TO discuss biblical problems To-
day to nny advantage there must be a thor
ouRh and familiar knowledge of the ono o
two hundred standard works in which tht
, discoveries Of the last fifty years are stated
, Now. until Mr.. Bradsn has overturned ths
+ conclusions OF tho majority Of great bibli
, cal scholats-kuenen and Welinnusen
, Schr ader and Dilrnan, Stade and Ki,tle
Wendt and Pileidsrer. Harnach and Sooin
> Driver and Cheyne. kyle and Kirkpatrick
t 1t is neediess for ms TO engage II
q such Il controversy. What l shoul,
, say would be restatement O
! their discoveries; they. not myself, arc tn
ones who must be reckoned with and over
thrown. 1t ls not nee ssary for me to On
gage in such a matter because primers an
elementary works on these subjects al
within the reach of those who wish t
know what biblical scholarship Ia to- day
and | trust that these are moro numerou
o than those who want nothing more moder
, than tho fourth century of our era. Trul
you're. j. ii. CRooKER.
: Helena, Feb. %.