New-York tribune., 1896-05-04
SELECTIONS FROM THE MAIL.
PROFESSOR TOYS ACCURACY.

THE HARVARD PROFESSOR NOT ADVERSE TO THE
VIEWS OF sAYCE.
To the Editor OF The Tribune.
Sir: have been hoping for several days to find In
your columns a reply from Professor Toy. or some
other competent authority. to correspondent OF
The Tribune who endeavored to controvert the
statements made In his lectures upon 1sraelltish
legends Meanwhile, may venture. as brieny as
possible. TO direct attention to some assertions
made by the writer. which believe TO be erroneous
and misleading?
Since The Tribune contained only resume OF the
lecturers remarks and several important and es-
sental details were doubtless omitted, owing to lack
Of space -. S. MS" assumption that mot scin-
tila of proof has been offered In support OF Pro-
fessor Toys statements Is surely altogether unwar-
rante1.
But your correspondents most garng and serious
error consists in leading his readers to suppose that
the results of the investigation and researches made
by the distinguished Assyrlologist Professor a. H.
Sayce are adverse to the views OF the Harvard pro-
fessor. While It is quite true that Egyptian and
Babylonan records in many instances coincide with
Old Testament narratives. Professor Sayce In The
Higher Criticism and the Monuments" $3.50, shows
very clearly that the latter derived from the
former not the former from the latter. Thus the
week Of seven days and the Sabbath are OF Baby
lonian origin, the very word sabbath being Baby
creation and food in Genesis strongly resemble the
legendary tales on Babylonian tablets: while the
Garden Of Eden and its mystical tree the creation
OF the woman out Of man, the fall of man from a
state Of innocence. etc. were known to the nhab-
itants of Chaldaea In pre-Semitic days.
Concerning the Book of Daniel, Professor Toy
says that Its hero never existed in the flesh. and
its visions not predictions" while Professor
Sayce is OF the opinion that contains serious mis-
takes that instead OF Its author (who speaks In the
first person singular) having been contemporary
OF Nebuchadnezzar, the work must have been writ
ten at a period later than that Of Alexander the
Great and that II associates persons and events
which really many years apart Other instances
might easily be given showing that these two writ
ers though differing to minor details agree upon
most essential points
to Kirjath-Sepher and the Book OF Joshua. We are
told (Joshua Ky. 1919 that this Canaantish city
during the lifetime OF Joshua; while little further
Judges l. !, H. ~ IL Is stated no less explicitly
that the incident occurred after the death OF Josnua
stone asserts, have been most iuily confirmed'
but why an anonymous work. which Is largely
history Of rapine and slaughter, should be called
the Word of God is not altogether clear, and thou
sands OF Christian people VIII continue to doubt
whether the sun and moon ever stood still -
Of Science with Theology" DIR. Andrew White says
OF Bishop Colenso that when he was questioned re-
the Bishop determined TO tell the truth He had
found even the Zulus whom he had tnought TO
convert, awakened by the legendary character OF
the old Testament He saw the danger OF tying re-
lirIon and morality TO interpretations and concep-
tions of Scripture more and more widely seen 10 De
contrary 10 facts; OF covering up iacts whlch must
soon be known, and the special danger OF sham
ordinations. Therefore he says: MY heart an
swerri in the words OF the prophet. 'Shaii man
speak lies in the name OF the Lord? determined N
not 10 do so. ~ H. w.
New-York May !. 1896.