Recent Testimony of Archaeology to the Scriptures. 323 that vile culture, but rather of a purer religion coming down and overwhelming it. 2. Another and still more important question concerning Palestine civilization is, What was the source and course of the fl d e o c m te in d a i n n t th c e iv B ili i z b a le tio a n cco a u n n d t o e f sp t e h c e ia m ll i y lle t n h n e iu r m elig pr io ec u e s di c n u g ltu an re d t r h e e millennium succeeding the birth of Abraham? Was it from e w s i t t i h n o e u i t n to h w er ar c d iv C il a iz n a a t a io n n o a r n f d ro c m ult C u a r n e a o a f n t o h u o t s w e a d r a d y ? s, D in id m P u a c l h or in all, but reflect Babylonia, or was she a luminary? PALESTINE AND BABYLONIA. The rev 1 s1 on of views concerning Palestinian civilization forced by recent excavations at once puts a bold interrogation point to the opinion long accepted by many of the source and course of religious influence during this formative period of patriarchal history, and the time of the working out of the principles of Israel's religion into the practices of Israel's life. If the Palestinian civilization during this period was equal l t o o n t i h a a , t th o e f n E t g h y e p o t, pi a n n i d on so th c a e t rt t a h i e nl fl y o n w ot o i f n r fe e r li i g o i r ou to s i t n h fl at ue o n f c B e a w b a y s then from Babylonia to Palestine must stand for its defense. Here arises the newest problem of biblical archaeology. And one of the most expert cuneiform scholars of the day, Albert T. Clay< 50 > , has essayed this problem and announces a kn r o e w vo n lu m ti a o t n er a i r a y l a so s l w ut e io ll n a o s f th it e b in y te a rp n r e e w tat i i n o t n er o p f re n ta ew tio ly n a o c f qu w ir e e ll d s m te a a te d ri o a f l. the Th so e u s r o ce lu o ti f on r.e i li s gi n o o u t s hi i n n g flu l e e n ss c , e i b n e d in ee g d B , a th b a y n lon th ia a , t a i n n d its early course from Babylonia into Palestine, exactly the reverse is true. "That the Semitic Babylonian religion is an t im io p n o , r d ta e t lu io g n e, fr a o n m te- S d y il r u ia vi a a n n d p P a a tr le ia s r ti c n h e s, (A et m c., ur o r f u) th , e tha B t a t b h y e lo c n re ia a n came from Amurru, instead of the Hebraic stories having come from Babylonia, as held by nearly a!l Semitic scholars."
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker