The sun., 1901-05-25
NEW Books.
Genesis and Modsrn knowledge,

n
well TO read The Book Of Genesis In the Light
Of Modern Knowledg," by the Rev Elwood
Worcester. ID, rector OF ST. stephens
Church. Philadelphia. Mcclure Phillips
COZ The lectures reprinted in this volume
were delivered to the authors congregation
in the winter OF isos-Oo They do not profess
20 teach scholars or 10 ofrer a complete COM
nentary on tho earlier chapters OF Genesis;
they simply carry us. indeed through the
story Of the Tower OF Babel. DR. Worcester
is undoubtedly right in thinking that these
lectures may find place with the reading
public between technical handbooks. which
are Instructive but not widely read, and
mere popular illusions which are read but
10 not instruct.
II il Dr. NorCesters opinion that COM
nrehensiye and really truthful study OF the
Book Of Genesis ought to include three dis
tlnct parts. First: one ought TO determine
exactly what this book is and what 1t actually
wishes TO teach secondly one should at
tempt TO ascertain the sources from which
lts ideas are derived and its relation 10 other
works Of the same sort, as. for example. the
cosmozonies OF the Babylonians and other
great lcttered peoples Of antiquity. Thirdly
one cannot altogether refuse to ask how
the universe to-day. With reference to tho
last aspect Of the subject we are reminded
that the principal question at the present
time Is not whether the cosmogonical views
propounded in Genesis are scientifically
true, but how they originated.
Among the many repetitions ard incon-
slsterces adduced by DR. Worcester 10 prove
that the Book of Genesis cannot be the work
t1 tnfA In
TWO different accounts of Creation. In the
nrst chapter, animals were made before man
while. in the second chapter. beginning Al
verse S. animals were made after man, and
yer. brought 20 him to receive their names
In the first chapter plants ard green herbs
uere made long before man. In the second
chapter, verse 5, the Hebrew reads, Not
shrub o. the field was then upon the earth,
and not herb Of the field had sprouted'
because Jehovah Elohim had not yet made
(, 20 rain upon the earth. and there was no
man 90 cultivate the ground And Jehovah
Flohim formed man of the dust Of the ground,
and hreathed In his nostrils the breath OF
life. the man became a living being The
translation here used is Lenormants. 10
name some other Inconsistencies, We note
,har in the frst chapter the dry ground rises
ou' of tho waters, In the second the whoIe
earth is dry, because II has not ralned IN
the first chapter man and woman were made
together And Elohim created man IN ms
own image, in the image Of Elohim He created
him. male and female created lie theh
In The second chapter man was made hrNt'
and woman afterward was taken ont oI ms
side In tho frst chapter Creation occupied
six separate days, In the second chnpter
only one day In the two accounts ot the
Flood, Noah s told in chapter q, "Ot every
living thing Of all flesh, two OF every sort
shalt thou bring into the ark; ana IN the
seventh chapter, "Of every clean ana IN
.Ieqn beast thou shalt take 10 thee by seVens
Twice We are told that the waters were forty
dsvs upon the earth, and again that theF
ircrassed for l50 days In the sixth chapt"r
rho limit Of mans age IL fixed AZ Y" years
hv,. soon after. Noah is represented MS s''
wears old when he died, and many oI NJ
descerdlnts are from 200 10 SO Years old
Dr Worcester submits that the passages
ou7'ed prove conclusivev Tint the BOOK ol
Genesis, as we now have Il, was not sln2I'
composition. the work Of one mird On
he hypothesis Of unity of authorship' Sncl
Inconsistencies and variations would he nh-
fbnkshle, unless the author wrote WIN
reckless haste, and cared naught about con-
rrpGIo'iuc himself half dozen times IN o.
rrnnv .onreuces When, however, We ge'
tie right point NJ view, the CONTRADICTIONS
seem narura, Biblical criticism has shown
that thcro were NJ least three narratve'
lying before the author who gave the hooN
its present form. all venerable. all beloved
and all telling much the same story IN dli,
frrent wnva What could be- more natura
than that his author wishing 10 Incorporate
in his compilation "a many oi thes" prl'"
less stories a. possible, md knowing tha'
the I-raelite people we're accustomed 10 heai
these old narratives in different forms shonl'
incline 10 sacrifice Just as little Of them as h'
could. and even to admit two or NOR" Yer
sions Of the same story where all seemed
N him beautiful ard edifyinR'
But. it may be asked, might not the com
riler have been Moses? In hiS discussion
Of this question Dr Worcester points on
that the jewish tradition that Moses wa
the author ~ the Pentateuch rests on th'
late authority Of Philo, Josephus and M
Talmud From the synagogue this belie
passed into the New Testament. and thence
INTO Christian versions of the Bible and INT.
Tho old church lists of the books ot the Ol'
Testament Nowhere In the Book Of Genesi
Itself is the assertion made that Moses wa
rs author In the later books OF the Penta
telch. where Moses Is mentioned, II Is AWAY
in the third person Curiously enough
Mosps's fathcr-in-law is called In Genesi
hv three different names, Rcuel. Jethro AM
Wohah As DR. Worcester suggests. what
ever may have been Moses's relations 70 hi
fgfher-in-law, It Is improbable that he di'
not know his name Again, We read IN N
fourteenth chapter Of Genesis, that 'Ahra
lam pursued them 70 Dan Dan was IN
chief city of the tribe Of Dan, when the chi
drep Of Israel had divided he land long afte
Mose-'s death Before thnt It was caIle
Lachish The proof that Moses was not N
author OF the books trndi'oually ascribe
10 him becomes more conclusive, If. instea
Of conaning ourselves TO single passage
ia Genesis. We take the Prntateuch rs who0
which we have right 10 do, since thos
wnoassert that Moses was the author Of Gene
s.s assert also that he wrote the whole Penta
'auch Set the whole book OF Lcviticu'
and 10 a certain extent Deuteronomy res
on the assumption that Jehovah can be VOL
shipped acceptably only in one place, tha
outside Of this supreme sanctuary, no alta
might he built, and that in this sanctuar
no ono but the anointed sons OF Aarof
assisted by the Icvites might serve Nc
tCdy else might even enter the holy place
ala 90 erect an altar 10 God anywhere els
is denounced a. an act OF supreme ~acrlleg'
ul all this tho older history knows Hothln
gf all -liuuel tl,, little Ephralmilc bO,