785
THE KING’ S BUSINESS
is an “outrage upon human understanding” and “ stands in contradiction to the spirit o f freedom that is o f faith,” any more than the affirmation or assumption a priori that there must be real discrepancies in the Bibid is. “an outrage upon the human under? standing.” The fact is that instead of affirming a priori on the one side or the other we should go to work with scientific precision to find out whether there are any real discrepancies. But the writer of this article goes even further, he says, “ Besides, it should not be overlooked that the discoveries o f modern historical and archaeological research, which have tended to confirm so many Biblical statements, seem just as surely to reveal error in oth ers.” This is simply assertion on the part o f the writer. He does not undertake to show where “ the discoveries o f modern historical and archaeological research” have revealed error in Bible statements; indeed, he could not show' it. The actual treat ment of supposed discrepancies is very incomplete and entirely unsatisfactory. The writer seems to be quite unacquainted with modern discussions o f these supposed dis crepancies. This is not only shown by his citation o f literature at the end o f the article, but by the general tenor o f the arti cle as well. Certainly the writer o f the article should have read up on the subject before he attempted to write upoh it for a work that in the main is so thoroughly scholarly and exhaustive as the Interna tional Standard Bible Encyclopaedia. How ever, this very weak and unsatisfactory arti cle is more than offset by the article on “ Inspiration.” This is one o f the most masterly and satisfactory discussions of the entire subject to be found in modern literature, and along something o f the same line is a very able article on “ The Bible.” It could be wished that in future editions o f the work this article on “ Discrepancies” could be supplemented by an article by some one who has made a thorough study o f the subject, or if that is not possible, that the article could be omitted. The geographical articles are excellent,
article on the Parousia is a hodge-podge, and dangerous in its implications. The article on “ Paradise” is not illuminating and very incomplete. The article on “ Future Punishment” is not dangerous nor unsound but it is weak. Perhaps as unsatisfactory an article as any in the whole work is that on “Evolution.” The writer o f the article does not seem to have very thoroughly mas tered the subject he handles and his con clusions naturally are not o f much value. The editors were evidently ashamed o f the article for they felt it necessary to append an editorial note as follow s: “It will be understood, that while Professor Zenos has been asked and permitted to state his views on this question unreservedly, neither the publishers nor the editors are to be held as committed to all the opinions expressed.” I f they felt this way, one wonders why they inserted the article, or at least if they thought necessary to insert it why they did not have another article written from a dif ferent standpoint and with more thorough ness and ability. Probably the Professor could have written more satisfactorily on some subject with which he was more famil iar. Any evil effect, however, o f this article can be offset by reading the scholarly and able article on “ Anthropology.” Another very poor and inadequate and misleading article is that on “Biblical Dis crepancies.” There is one sentence in it that is to the point as far as it goes, viz., “ It should be observed that apparent incon sistencies may not be real ones; as so often in the past, so again it may come about that discovery o f further data may resolve many an apparent contradiction.” This is very godd as far as it goes, but the writer renders the statement nugatory by follow ing immediately with these w ords: “On the other hand, the affirmation a priori that there can be and are no real discrepancies in the Bible is not only an outrage upon human understanding, but it stands also in contradiction o f the spirit o f freedom that is of faith.” It is difficult to see why “ the affirmation a priori that there can be and are nb real discrepancies in the Bible”
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker