Old Testament Criticism and New Testament Christianity 21 ment is that a number of leading archaeologists who were formerly in hearty agreement with the critical school, have now abandoned this view and oppose it. As Sir William Robertson Nicoll has forcibly said: “The significant fact is that the great first-hand archaeologists as a rule do not trust the higher criticism. This means a great deal more than can be put on paper to account for their doubt. It means that they are living in an atmosphere where argu- ments that flourish outside do not thrive.” Professor Flinders Petrie, the great Egyptologist, uttered these words not long ago: “I have come to the conclusion that there is a far more solid basis than seems to be •sup- posed by many critics. . . . 1 have not the slightest doubt that contemporary documents give a truly solid founda- tion for the records contained in the Pentateuch. . . . The essential point is that some of these critical people support from an a priori basis instead of writing upon ascertained facts. We should remember that writing at the time of the Exodus was as familiar as it is now. . . . The fact is that it is hopeless for these people by means merely of verbal criticism to succeed in solving all difficulties that arise.” 8. ARE THE VIEWS OF MODERN CRITICISM CONSISTENT WITH THE WITNESS OF OUR LORD TO THE OLD TESTAMENT ? The Christian Church approaches the Old Testament mainly and predominantly from the standpoint of the resur- rection of Christ. We naturally inquire what our Master thought of the Old Testament, for if it comes to us with His authority, and we can discover His view of it, we ought to be satisfied. In the days of our Lord’s life on earth one pressing ques- tion was, “What think ye of the Christ ?” Another was, “What is written in the Law? How readest thou?” These questions are still being raised in one form or another, and today, as of old, the two great problems—two “storm-
Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker