New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1897-09-26
THE BIBLE AND ARCH ZOOLOGY.

In a recent article Professor Sayce the dis
tngushed English archToogist. gives 1t as MS
opinion that the archaeological discoveries III
Bible lands which have attracted so much al
tenton In the last few years have vlndlcnted
the authenticity and truthfullcss of the BIBLICAL
books, and he expresses the firm belief that TINS
will continue TO be the case In the future Inc
opinion of such man Is entitled to the greatest
respect. and will be taken by many people as
final. II Is certainly true that many or Inc oid
records that have been unearthed do tend 10
confirm the historical accuracy Of certain Blbli-
cal narratives while other records that make
no direct auslon 10 incidents related IN the
Bible are in entire harmony with It's atmosphere
and environment This much the science or
Biblical archaeology hns already done. though
it is yet In It's infancy. Whatever notifications
may he made in the popular conception OF the
Biblical books by the kindred sciences OF HI
erary criticism and archaeology, the honesty and
good faith OF It's writer's can no longer be ques-
toned by any scholar OF repute. The time Inns
gone by when the Bible can he held up to rldi-
cule MS n collection Of absurd myths and fables.
Nevertheless Christians who accept the ira
ditonal view Of the Bible as the only tenablr
belief concerning II will do well 10 hesitate be
fore they commit themselves fully 10 the state
ment that the testimony OF archaeology must be
accepted as final For II they take that ground
they may find themselves confronted some day
with archaeological evidence that on its face
will contradict certain views OF the Bible which
they regard as dvnely true A good illustration
OF this is the question OF Biblical chronology. IN
volving the age OF the world or. rather, the
antiquity OF the human race According 70 the
chronology OF Archbishop Usher. carefully de-
duced by him from the Bible. and accepted un
I'll recently the only authoritative View on
the question, the first man created about
four thousand years before the birth OF Christ
But according 10 the biologists. conscious life
must have existed on the earth long ages before
the supposed date OF Adams creation AT first
this view was violently assaulted by certain the0
loganS as subyersIve OF the teachings OF Script
ure; but most Christian scholars to-day accept
It as at least good working hypothesis. and
admit that Usher's chronological deductions
from the Bible may not be wholly exact His
Interpretation Of the Bible on that point was
only human, md therefore falllble.
AS bearing on the same question the recent
discovery Of cunelform tablets in the ruins Of
the ancient Babyonian city OF Nippur are OF
absorbing interest 10 Biblical students For so
far as they have been declphered. It Is said by
arcnPOlORlStS tDdl lney prove DtIO1u dispute
that the city Of Nippur had reached a high degree
Of civilization and culture eight thousand or nine
thousand years ago In othcr words. II that
assumption should prove 10 be- correct. man
must really have appeared on the earth many
thousand years before the date OF his appear
ancc according 10 the Usher chronology. We
are quite aware that the Christian Church is
not irrevocably committed TO the Usher chro-
nology, and that n much earlier date for the
appearance OF man on the earth may be accept
cd without running counter 10 the approved
conclusions OF Christian scholars. But that this
Is so Is only IN accident. The apparent chrome
logical data OF the Bible might have been IN
corporated into the authoritative teachings OF
Christianity, in which case Christians Of to-day
would have been compelled either to give up
tenet Of their faith or reject the historical evil
dence Of archaeology. During the last few
years an enormous mass OF Inscriptions. tablets
and manuscripts have been found In the ruins
OF ancient tombs and cities OF the East, few OF
which have yet been deciphered or collated
That many OF them will throw light the rec
ords OF the Bible is entirely probable And
what Christian scholars will do in case some Of
these records should dscrcdit certain commonly
accepted views of the Bible is an exceedingly
interesting question