Blue-grass blade., 1894-11-11
NOAH'S ARK.
An Editorial Letter to Rev
Prof. ]. w. McGarvey
About That Fa-
nous Boat.
Rev, Prof. I. w. McGaryey.

lucky University, and your reputation as
a speaker and writer on theology, make
you, perhaps, the most prominent
theologian in Kentucky. You and re-
ceived over theological training in the
same institution, and we have stood to-
gether in the same pulpit. You said Of
me, in a sermon at the Broadway Chris
tian church in this city, that though
had said many hard things you never
knew me to tell lie. We have been
personal friends ever since first knew
you, which was before the war. You and
Col. Balm and are recognized as the
most energetic workers for Prohibition
in Lexington. You presided over body
of churchmen who exec nmunicated me
from the Christian church simply be-
cause / did not believe the miraculous
part of the Bible, and not because you
knew, or even suspected, any immorali-
ty in my life. declined to appear be-
fore your ecclesiastic body when cited to
do so, because was Indifferent as to the
result of your deliberation, but, had
appeared in my own defence, You were
presumably ready to attempt to show
why you were right in believing in the
infallibility of the Bible, and why was
wrong in not believing in it. The in
struction to you as a Christian, and
much more as minister of the gospel
is, "be ready always to give to
every man that asketh you, a reason of
the hope that is within you" Il. Peter
). Isl.
You have recently written for the
Christian Standard, Cincinnati, some
long articles defending the story of the
Deluge and Noah's Ark, as given in the
Bible, against some one who attacked
that account from the standpoint OF
what is known as higher criticism"
read some of your argument in that
connection, and think that you probably
sustained yourself against the higher
critic " but the great body of inhdels,
one of whom l am, no more accept the
principles of higher criticism" than
they do those of orthodox religionists.
Dean Milman and Cannon Farrar, for
instance, are higher critics" and as
prominent as any theologians in the
world.
will give a specimen of their reason
ing. In the New Testament we have the
following language in connection with
the miraculous manifestations said to
have occurred at the death of Jesus.
"And the tombs were opened; and
many bodies of the saints that had fallen
asleep were raised; and coming forth out
of the tombs after his resurrection they
entered into the holy city and appeared
unto many" Matt. ~; 5I-53).
Here the resurrection of the saints is
brought into direct connection with that
of Jesus, care being taken to place their
resurrection after his, in order that he
might have the honor of being first in
the procession; and the one event ap
pears to be fully as miraculous as the
other, the earthquake, the rising, and
the appearing unto many being related
of each. But the resurrection of the
saints is allowed, even by conservative
critics, to be visionary and mythical
Milman says of it:
"The same convulsion the earthquake
would displace the stones which covered
the ancient tombs and lay open many o.
thA inuumerablc-zeck-he sepulchre:
which perforated the hills on every side
Of the city, and expose the dead to pub
lie view. To the awe-struck and depress
ed minds of the followers of Jesus, ne
doubt, were confined those visionary ap
pearances of the spirits of their deceased
brethren" Quoted in Supernatural
Religion" from Milman's Hist. Christian
ity, l, p. 366).
And to the same effect Farrar:
"An earthquake shook the earth ant
split the rocks, and as it rolled away from
their places the great stones which
closed and covered the cavern sepulchre
of the Jews, so it seemed to the imagina
tions of many to have disimprisoned thu
spirits of the dead, and to have filled th'
air with ghostly visitants, who afte
Christ had risen appeared to linger il
the holy city" Life of Christ, p. 66I)
Such admissions as these on the par
of able and professed apologists canno
but reveal how singularly frail is tn,
evidence for the resurrection of Jesus
for if the resurrection of the saints wa
the product of pious imagination o
the followers of Jesus, and their appear
ance unto many in Jerusalem visionary,
the resurrection of Jesus may safely b
regarded as of the same character an,
referred to the same cause, the earth
quake being in each case as completed,
mythical as the resurrection. The lima
gination which raised the saints coul,
be depended upon not to leave Jesus ii
the grave.
In your reply to the higher critic"
did not any where find any place from
which could determine whether or no
you believed the story of the Noachial
deluge was an actual occurrence, o
whether its existence in she Bibl
could be explained away as Milman AM
Farrar explain away the story of the res
direction of the saints at the crucifXiol
of Jesus.
am very anxious to hear you defnitel
on this point, and think there are
great many people who would say tn
same. l do not know whether or no
: YOU believe the story of .Soah't food, a
given in the Bible, but assuming tina
YOU do will dogmatically assert the in
fidel view of the matter, and if you ca
not accept that view, ask You to fur
nish your written objection to it, pre-
ferring that you should use my paper a
your means of communication.
It seems to me that if you believe tina
story of the ark you must of necessit
associate'with it, in your own mind, som
of the details of the story, and these
would like for you TO give us. For in
stance, please explain to us how tn
varieties of animals that lived in Amer
ca, and Australia and other islands an
remote lands, being such animals a
were not found in the country wher
the ark was built, got to the ark.
II is said that Noah took all kinds {
food for all kinds of animals and also a
kinds of food for himself and his famil,
The food Of all the carniverous animal
is the flesh of other animals, and pal
of the food of Noah and his family mus
have been the flesh of animals, and sur
posably of the clean animals, of whicl
there were but two of each.
How then could Noah feed himse
and his family, and large part of til
animals on the flesh of other animal
without destroying some of the limite
number of animals of each kind that h
was allowed to take into the ark
Supposing Noah TO have killed AM
mails to get flesh for his family and hi
fesh-eating animals TO eat and 10 liav
stored it away in the ark before tn
food began, how could he keep the nes
from becoming tainted during the tim
of the flood? The animals would nc
eat it if salted, and there seems to hav
been no provision for either natural G
artificial ice. If it be answered that Go
could have Dreseryed fhA ,naat ,,,;rac,