The Providence news. (Providence [R.I.]) 1891-1906, 1902-12-01


What men think OF the Bible will al
ways be determined by what men thlnk
OF God And what men think of Goa
will always be simply another designa-
tion OF the spirit OF the age. This, l
think is clear: what men think OF the
Bible will always be determined by what
men think OF God, for the Bible STANDS
before us as a book which claims 10 De
Gods revelation to man. III men noiu
that God is not one who can make
revelation TO men OF Himself and OF Ills
plan; or one who has no plan, or no SELF
which can be revealed: or one who,
though he has plan and self capable
OF revelation. does not reveal II In this
objective, historical, literary way; then
they will be most likely 20 discount the
Bible In all its supernatural claims, III
they hold the opposite OF these things
then they will be most likely to put
premium upon these claims.
SPIRIT OF THE AGE.
SO what men think OF God will always
be simply another designation of the
spirit OF the age. for the spirit OF the age
is, after all, simply the manifestation or
its thought 1t seems sometimes to be
the manifestation of Its actions, put
what men do IN any age Is the outcome on
what men think. And mems greatest
thinking has always heen ana Will al
ways be gathered arouhd what stands TO
them as God. II the spirit of the age Is
way OF saying that it's thought is away
from God And II It's thought Is away
from God 1t will be away from the Bible
| fancy there are many who would
characterize the spirit OF this age as
hopelessly away from God. or, IL towards
him. towards him In a hopoiessly mate
a ase has has seen sna the M thought OF men moving
towards this Bible In deeper and 4
more profoundly spiritual way. 1t must
be then that the age Is at Its heart an
age whose spirit holds to God and holds
to him az personality, who, though
above these earthly conditions In which
we move. moves with US in the reality OF
our earthly being and experience.
A century ago, however. II was differ
emit That was an age whose thinking.
II not away from. God. put God away
great Deistic philosophy. and the results
for the Bible were seen at once In the
attack which scholars made on this book
we are having before us for our study
now this book. which probably more
than any other Bible book gives us God =
revelation OF himself-Goepel OF John.
FIRST MODERN ATTACK.
In 1922 critic OF this school came out
with the first modern attack upon the
Gospel and based his onslaught on what
between the fourth Gospel and the synop-
tic Gospels and Apocalypse. concluding
that the fourth Gospel must have come
from some Platonic philosophy OF the sec
This English attack was followed by n
similar attack In Germany. simply be-
Its way across the channel and had turn
ed mems thinking there (as Il had turned
them In great Brittany away from the
book OF Gods revelation of himself But
n onL hnr s1ayb
one than the English. tGenerally the diff
ference between the scholarship OF these
two courtriea.l
The Germans grounded their objections,
as had the English. on the essential DIFF
ferences between the fourth Gospel and
the Synoptics. hut they went more deeply
Into the character Of the fourth Gospels
contents themselves. and claimed that
they showed
An exaggera ted character Of mira Gle
,such as Lazarus body. man born blind
>. A metap physical style ~ discourse
impossible for Christ to use.
g. An affinity between the Gospels
theology and the theology of Phlo.
T. A scarcity OF reference 10 existence
Of the book IN and Immediately succeed
Ing the Apostolic age
MADE IN GERMANY.
IL IL strange that I'm the century OF
criticism which has passed since this at
tack was made there have been practi-
cally no other arguments against tn,
Gospel beyond these. This covers gen.
orally all that has been said by criticism
In one hundred years. And this made nc
lasting Impression when 10 was said
Twenty years and more passed along be
fore another attack was made. and wher
AZ came ~ was simply this old attack
dressed In new array.
IT, too. was made I'm Germany and
laid It's emphasis upon the contradictions
between the fourth Gospel and the Synop.
tics, though n concentrated those con
tradictions at the point OF the dlscourses
and said they could MT have come from
the memory OF the Apostle John. they
must have been created oy another John
who came from the philisoph cal region
" Alexandria. and lived century after
Christ
To this attack there was an immediat,
reply. ft came from that school OF sDlr.
ituai scbolr rshlp which has made Ger
many influential long after the fame oi
her philosorhies has gone-thc school o
Schleirmachcr and Eeander and Maiuch
men whose deep ita'ght into the things oi
God wrought rrOfounciv upon their Owt
times. and Is felt now In these times oi
ours.
This reply effected iauch. The Gosne
seened 20 be brought into higher favoi
than before Even the critics thcrisclvcl
said they were convinced.
But The age was changing It's think
ing wss grouping it.eif into new phlloso
u,,ies. phiioeophies that carried mcn FUR
ther away from God. end carried God
further away from men. And 50 ther'
came upon fte stage such men StrauFs
who said there was no need or talkins
about the contradictions between tn
fourth Gospel and the synoptics Thii
was mere waste time. for there was NJ
Gospel history ~ ALI 70 talk about ~ as
cipies.. no Christ. The whole thing wa
myth.
NO RIGHTFUL RECORD
A.