The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1895-01-12
EVOLUTION AND THE BIBLE.

The radical critics hold, generally,
that the Bible as we have it is the
product of evolution. IL is the sac
red literature of the Hebrew people
or the literary remains of this people.
This literature is a development of
this people or record of their de-
velopment. 1t brings to us some
thing of an account of the mental
and moral growth of this people. 1t
shows US how they unfolded from the
germ to the flower and fruit.
The Bible therefore, as collection
of this literature, is record of the
growth of the Hebrew people. As
they grew it grew, and SO it contains
almost all sorts of things except
special revelation from God. 1t
records the experience of the Hebrew
people but there is nothing peculiar
or special in this experience. 1t is on
the same level of that of other peo-
Piles. The Hebrews went through
the same process of development that
all other ancient peoples have gone
through and so their Bible is just as
good and no better than other Bibles.
Its prophets and wise men were the
product of their times. They were
evolved by their environment. They
spake not as they were moved by the
Holy Spirit, but as they were moved
by the spirit of their age, perhaps the
better spirit. Jesus, for instance,
was the product of heredity, and en-
vironment. He grew out of the re-
ligious soil and climate of his native
land. There was nothing supernat-
ural about him. He was just the
natural product of moral and relig-
ious evolution. So evolution pro-
duced the whole Bible. 1t may be,
we think it is, conceded to be one of
the greatest feats of evolution; new
ertheless it is all the work of evolu-
ton and of nothing else.
And yet according to these critics
tie Bible don't seem to be worth
much after all. AS you follow their
teachings and see how numerically
they cut it up, you begin to feel
that what is left after they get
through is hardly worth considering.
The miraculous element is elimin-
ated first of all Miracles are myths
or monstrosities, Authorizations or ex-
aggerations, twists of vision or vision
airy twists, mistakes or willful inven-
tons. Miracles cannot be; therefore
all accounts of miracles are to be dis
credited. AS to the Old Testament,
we do not know who wrote many
Of the books and what is worse,
we do not know that what they did
write is true. AS to the New Tes-
lament, it processes to give an &C
count of man who once lived, I'M
doubtedly, and was, it is likely, very
good sort of man; but as a source of
information as to his real character,
teachings and doings, it is quite I'M
trustworthy. 1t tells us that he
wrought miracles, but evidently he
did not. We read that he was cruc-
flied and rose from the dead the third
day. His crucifixion is likely, but his
resurrection is myth or delusion.
AS to his teachings we are much in
the dark. Teachings are ascribed to
him that are not his. In fact about all
the essential doctrines OF his religion
can be found in other sacred books.
In fine the Bible is worthless for
dogma. That is, you can't prove any
thing by it, or rather you can prove
everything by it, which amounts to
the same thing. Such is the Bible
according tothese evolutionary critics.
And yet this Bible is the work of ev-
olution. Evolution has been evolving
it through thousands of years. 1t is
the consummate flower of the moral
and spiritual evolutionary process.
Verify one is moved to exclaim 'the
mountain labored and brought forth
a mouse" AS maker of bibles evo-
luton is certainly not a success. Most
any kind of special creation or super
natural revelation could make as good
Bible as this evolutionary critical
production.
Then there is another thing about
this way of making the Bible. Many
of these evolutionary critics are the
istic in faith and lay great stress on
the immanence of God. He is in all
things and must therefore be in this