^ \ a “s p v cs. ' ' p V\ be absolutely certain. Its memory has been pre served by three different later sources that have been woven together to form the present Book of Exodus: the Jahwist epic (c. 950 B.C.), the Elohist epic (c. 750 B.C.), and the Priestly writing (after the exile in 586 B.C.). These sources (often abbreviated J. E. and P) come from different groups and differ ent periods of Israel’s life. They reflect not only the memory of the original happenings in the age of the exodus, but also the later theological concerns and liturgical practices of the various groups. They are not eyewitness reports. Ruth Douglas See’s Make the Bible Your Own is a co-operative text published for the Co-operative Publi cation Association by the John Knox Press, Richmond, Virginia. This is a source book under the elective system used by many N.C.C. denominations. On pages 71 and 72 we find the following: To deny that the Bible as we have it has a single error of any kind is rather like denying that one’s mother ever sinned. But to keep looking and looking for mistakes in the Bible is like forever pointing out the mistakes one’s mother made. A Univac makes no mistakes; mothers do, but only a mother can give us life. Do you understand what is implied? Univac makes no mistakes, but the Bible does. A mechanism invented by man makes no mistakes, but the inspired writings make mistakes like a mother. We continue reading from Make the Bible Your Own: At the very beginning of the Bible we run into a particular problem: How are we to understand the narratives of the first eleven chapters of Genesis? These, we will recall, are the events of pre-history, which set the stage for God’s great drama of redemp tion. Although some devout Christians would like to do so, it is surely impossible to locate the Garden of Eden on a map of the Middle East, discover the remains o f the Ark in the Ararat Mountains, or iden tify any particular ancient mound in Iraq as the Tower of Babel. These stories have much in common with folk tales and doubtless draw on legendary sources, but they are much more profound than mere legends. In recent times they have been called tales, parables, myths; but none of these terms is quite accurate. The word “myth” is here used in a spe cialized sense, not as something unreal and fanciful like dryads or unicorns, but more in the way in which the term is used in Plato’s dialogues—a story which conveys a great truth. Take for example the first chapter of Genesis, the story of creation. Since this account is generally believed to have been writ ten during the exile in Babylon, it is interesting to compare the Genesis story with Babylonian tradi tions recorded on clay tablets. Here mythology runs riot. In one account the god Marduk battles the sea monster Tiamut, slays her, and then slits open her body to form the earth and the heavens. The account in Genesis moves on an entirely different plane. It is not a geological, astronomical, or biological explana tion of the creation, to be sure, nor does it set out to be; it is a theological account, declaring in magnifi cent poetry that the sovereign God is “ the Maker of heaven and earth.” The second quarter of study for tenth grade Ameri can Baptist youth is in a course entitled, In the Begin ning, by John E. Skoglund. Beginning on page 37 we read the following information: HOW GENESIS CAME TO BE To understand better the message of Genesis, we (continued on next page) 13
W H A T DO TH E SU N D A Y SCHOOL PUBLICATIONS of ma jor denominations teach concerning Mosaic au thorship of the Pentateuch? We cannot ascertain the details of co-operation, but no one can deny collaboration on this subject of Mosaic authorship. All of the publish ers of the materials reviewed in this issue are follow ing what has been known to theological students as Higher Criticism. Eichhorn, Graf and Wellhausen are a few of the more important “ lights” in this destructive and critical view of the Bible. Professors in American seminaries were attracted to these views when they studied on the continent of Europe. These views were in turn spread throughout the United States in the semi naries. One by one, the great churches of America fell prey to the liberal leadership. The liberal-fundamental ist controversies were an outgrowth of the spread of Higher Criticism. But now the same diabolical views, in the name of unidentified scholarship, are being taught in the Sunday school publications of the major denomi nations. When we examine the Adult Teacher, published by the Methodist Publishing House, January, 1964, we dis cover in the center spread a chart entitled “ Time Line of the Bible.” An almost identical chart, but more color ful—can be found in an adult Bible study book pub lished by the Lutheran Church Press with a 1964 copy right. The title of the book is The Mighty Acts of God and has been authored by Robert J. Marshall. What are some of the features o f this chart? The dates for the writings of the books of the Old Testament are given on the basis of Higher Criticism. The JEDP theory of the authorship of Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy is fully illustrated. Jahwist, according to the chart, was written in 1950, the Elohist was writ ten in 950, the Deuteronomist was written in 650 and the Priestly editor completed his revision and additions in 550. The Book of Daniel was written at least 300 years after Daniel was dead. Here are the words of Jesus Christ on the same subject: And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me (Luke 24:44). Jesus Christ, the Son of God, put His imprimatur upon the Mosaic authorship of the first five books of the Bible. His words concerning the Book of Daniel refute the unidentified scholarship in these Sunday school publications: When ye therefore shall see the abomination of deso lation, spoken of by Daniel the prophet . . . (Matt. 24:15). On the authority of the Word of God, we can cor rectly challenge this so-called scholarship. Whoever these scholars are that are quoted, they are mistaken; they were not there when it was written. We find the same ideas expressed in a United Pres byterian Church publication, Crossroads, a Study and Program Magazine for Adults, October-December, 1964, on page 26: Concerning the precise course of the total event and the detailed circumstances surrounding it, we cannot AUGUST, 1965 the Attacks by Edgar R. Koons
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker