On this page
-
Text (2)
-
January 12 1856.] THE LEADEB. 4X
-
INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS. Introduction to...
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
-
-
Transcript
-
Note: This text has been automatically extracted via Optical Character Recognition (OCR) software. The text has not been manually corrected and should not be relied on to be an accurate representation of the item.
Additionally, when viewing full transcripts, extracted text may not be in the same order as the original document.
The New Year Generally Introduces New Pe...
intellect , exact in its information , rigid in its requirements , disciplined in its exercises . The two grow together ^ the early natural fancy touching the far extremities of the universe , lightly playing with the scheme of all things ; the precise , compacted memory slowly accumulating special facts , exact habits , clear and painful conceptions . A . t last , as it were in a moment , the cloud breaks up , the division sweeps away ; we find that in fact these exercises which puzzled us , these languages which we hated , these details which we despised , are the instruments of true thought , are the very keys and openings , the exclusive access to the knowledge which we loved . The review of Helps's Spanish Conquest" is not up to the subject . The " Life and Writings of Dr . Young" is little more than an analysis of Peacock ' s book . But the article which will probably excite by far the greatest attention is that on " Atheism , " by an unmistakable hand . Direct grappling with the position of Atheism there is little or none ; but the tone is lofty and liberal , and much of the article will be considered as alarmingly so . For
instance : — When people assume that an atheist viust " live without God in the world , " they assume what is fatal to their own Theism . We deeply believe that by far the greater part of all lmman trust does not arise , as is commonly supposed , from our seeking God , but from God ' s seeking us ; and this , too , without any clear admission or confession on our part of His influence upon us ;—that a great deal of it is trust in goodness rather than in any personal God , and might possibly be held along with intellectual disbelief of His personal existence j in short , that if you could blot out on the one hand all acts of self-confessed trust in God , —if you could blot out all private and public toorship , properly so called , spurious or genuine , all churches , all creeds , all pharisaism , and all pure conscious devotion ; and if , on the other hand , you might leave all this , and blot out of the earth , all
unconscious and unconfessed acts of surrender to the divine influence in the heart , —all that weight possibly be connected with purely intellectual Atheism , — you would blot out more of true " religion , " more of that which " binds together " human society , more of God ' s true agency on the earth , in the latter case than in the former . Of course we do not mean that the truest unconscious trust iu God ' s influence is not generally to be found in the same minds which , at other times , also consciously confess Him ; but only this , that if in every life , whether of faith , or doubt , you mimbered up the acts of trust which are not rendered to God personally , but to the instincts and impulses which so often represent Him in the heart , and which might continue to represent Him even when the dark cloud of conscious doubt of His existence had intervened , you would probably have numbered far more acts which really originate in divine influence than could possibly be found animated by a real conscious personal belief .
Again , the wisdom of this sentence , bold as it will appear , deserves especial attention : " There is no teaching more mischievous in its effects than that which makes human belief in God the Jirst regenerating power in human society , and God Himself the second ; which makes God ' s blessing a consequence of malt's confession , and which therefore limits that blessing to the narrow bounds of the confession . " This , again , is very noteworthy : — It is clear that Atheism necessarily tends relatively to reduce the influence and independence of the higher intellectual and moral faculties ( even where fche real existence of these is not disputed ) , as compared with that of the . senses , social impulses , and those energies which tell upon the world . And this it does both involuntarily and unconsciously , by . eradicating from the imagination that haunting image of the divine character- which most stimulates these faculties into
action , and also voluntarily and consciously , because the atheist must in consistency believe that tho theists' worship gives them an unfair prominence . Holding that the human mind is in direct contact with no other mind , but is the latest and highest consummation of forces pushing upwards from a , lower stage of existence , the atheist cannot regard Ms own highest mental states—conscience , affection , and so forth—as having any independent illumination of their own , — as skylights opened to let in upon human nature an infinite dawn from above , — but rather as a polished arch or dome completing and reflecting the whole edific beneath . To Him tho highest point of human culture is the absolutely highest point in tho mental universe ; mere non-existence roofs us in beyond ; and of course , therefore , the highest faculties we possess must derive their sole validity
and their solo meaning from tho lower nature to which they add the finishing touch . No doubt he will admit that new power and insight is gained , the higher self-culture is pushed ; but the new power is not power from beyond human nature , tho new insight is not insight into a region above it ; it is only the stronger grasp of a more practised hand , the keener vision of a more comprehensive survey . Hence , by dismissing the faith in God , Atheism necessarily props up the higher faculties of man completely and solely on the lower organisation , and denies thorn any independent spring . Moroover , tho atheist is led to justify and fortify himself in this natural result of his modes of thought by assuming , as Feuerbach does , that tho object of man ' s worship , if there be any , ought to be n perfect man , and that tho theist ' s God is not even strictly a magnified shadow of humanity , but only of a special and arbitrarily selected portion of humanity .
Fkukbbach's answer to this would be , " 1 desire Humanity to be regarded as the highest ideal . " There are several passages in this paper we had marked for extract and discussion ; but our limits absolutely forbid further extension . We must convey in a sentence our admiration qf the masterly criticism of Thackeray as moralist and artist : and so dismiss the National for the present .
January 12 1856.] The Leadeb. 4x
January 12 1856 . ] THE LEADEB . 4 X
Introduction To Genesis. Introduction To...
INTRODUCTION TO GENESIS . Introduction to the Book of Genesis , with a Commentary on the Opening Portion . From thQ Gorman of Dr . Von Bohlon . Edited by James Hoywoixl , M . P . In 2 vote . London : John Chapman . What is tho office of the Biblical critic in relation to the OU 1 Testament 1 There arc various answers to this question . Extreme orthodoxy says , that since there is irrefragable external evidence for the Divine origin and direct verbal inspiration of the Hebrew Scriptures , the critic has simply to interpret the meaning of the text : any record which » a in contradiction with the text , if not roconcilcablc by hypothesis , is to be pronounced false ; but if nn undeniable fact turns out to be in contradiction with the text , tho received interpretation is to be reconsidered and altered so aa to agree with the undeniable fact . According to this theory the critic has not to examine the Hebrew writings in order to ascertain their origin , but
having beforehand settled their origin , he has to explain ev erything so as to make it accord with this premiss . He is not an inquirer , but an advocate . He has not to weigh evidence in order to arrive at a conclusion , but havingarrived at a conclusion , he has to make it the standard by which he accepts or rejects evidence . His criticism is a deductive process , which has for its axiom , The Hebrew writings are from beginning to end revealed truth . And it is only while orthodoxy strictly adheres to this point of view that it is on safe and consistent ground ; for if we are to examine a book for proofthough it be only confirmatory proof— of its origin , we must have some criteria to judge it by , and we can only obtain such criteria by borrowing them from pure historical criticism , an ally that must be ultimately incompatible with rigid orthodoxy . As long as we rely implicitly on testimony as evidence of a man ' s health , we have no need to examine the indications of health in his person ; but the moment we feel the testimony insufficient , vre must have recourse to physiological criteria , which are common to every human
organism . The first symptom that orthodoxy begins to feel the pressure of historical criticism is shown in an extension of the " accommodation" theory . As the Deity , it is said , in speaking to human beings , must use human language , and consequently anthropomorphic expressions ^ such as the " eye of God , " thje " arm of God , " the " laughter and jealousyof God , " which we have no difficulty in understanding figuratively , so lie must adapt the form of His revelations to the degree of culture , " which belongs to men at the period in which His revelations are made . He teaches them as a father teaches his children , by adapting the information , he gives to their narrow stock of ideas . It was in this way that the candid Dr . Pye Smith explained the narratives of the Creation and the Deluge , to the great scandal of his Evangelical brethren . It
is easy to see that this system of interpretation is very elastic , and that it may soon amount to little more than a theological formula for the history of human development . The relation between the theory of accommodation and that of development is analogous to the relation between the doctrine that . the brain is the organ of mind , and the doctrine that mind is the function of the brain ; in both cases the manifestation of mind is determined by the conditions of the body . And thus the " jrccommodation" theory necessarily leads to what may be called a mitigated orthodoxy or a mild heterodoxy , which allows the presence of mythical and legendary elements in the Hebrew records ^ and renounces the idea that they are from beginning to end infallible , but still
regards them as the medium of a special revelation , as the shell that held a kernel of peculiarly Divine truth , . by which a monotheistic faith was preserved , and the way prepared for the Christian dispensation . They who hold this theory believe that the Hebrew nation was the grandest instrument of Providence—the Hebrew writings , the vehicle of superhuman truth ; but they do not believe in talking serpents and talking asses , or in divine-commands to butcher men wholesale ; and they hold that , to identify a belief in such fables with the faith of a Christian , is as dangerous to reverence as it would be to fix an absurd popinjay on tlie divine symbol of the Cross . The laws of Moses , are something more to them than the laws of Menu—a Hebrew
prophet something more than a religious and patriotic poet ; a chapter of Isaiah something more than the Hymn of Cleanthes . They do not feel about the Hebrew temple and the Hebrew worship as they feel about a temple of Isis or the Eleusinian mysteries : the history of Israel is a sacred precinct to thern —they take their shoes from off their feet , for it is holy ground . To them , therefore , the Old Testament is still an exceptional book ; they only use historical criticism as a winnowing fan to carry away all demands on their belief , which are not strictly involved in their acceptance of Christianity as a special revelation .
Extreme heterodoxy , on the contrary , holds no conviction that removes the Hebrew scriptures from the common category of early national records , which are a combination of myth and legend , gradually clarifying at then * later stages into genuine histor } r . It enters on the examination of the Old Testament with as perfect a freedom from pre- suppositions , as unreserved a submission to the guidance of historical criticism , as if it were examining the Vedas or the Zendavesta , or the fragments of Manetho and Sanchoniathon . Qn thus looking at the Hebrew records by the " light of common day , " without the lamp of faith , heterodoxy finds in them no evidence of anything exceptionally divine , but sees in them simply the history and literature of a barbarous tribe that gradually rose from fetichism to a ferocious polytheism ,
offering human sacrifices , and ultimately , through the guidance of their best men , and contact with more civilised nations , to Jehovistic monotheism . It finds in them , as in other early records , a mythical cosmogony , ah impossible chronology , and extravagant marvels tending to natter national vanity , or to aggrandise a priesthood ; it finds discrepant conceptions of Deity in . documents attributed to one and the same source ; it finds legislative enactments , springing from an advanced period , stamped with the sanction of primeval names , or of mythical crises in the national history ; in short , it not only finds in the Hebrew writings nothing which cannot be accounted for on grounds purely human , but it finds them of a character which it would be monstrous to attribute to any other than a human origin .
These are results arrived at in the present dny by very grave and competent scholars , and whatever opinion may be held concerning them , no educated person can dispense with some knowledge of the evidence on which they are based . There are few books , at least in English , better adapted to give such knowledge in a concise form tlmn the Introduction to Genesis by Von Bohlen , named at the head of our article . Yon Bohlcn ' s was a thoroughly earnest and reverent mind , and orthodox believers need never be shocked by his manner , if they are inevitably pained by his matter . To this admirable qualification he added thnt of immense learning , especially in the been first b work
department of Hindoo literature , his fame having won y a on "• Ancient India . " We have only to regret thtit Mr . Hcywood did not heighten the value of his disinterested labour in editing tho Introduction to Genesis , by publishing it in a cheaper and more portable form . Tho first volume is chiefly occupied with consideration a on the origin and character of tho Pentateuch , " or live books of Moses , generally , considerations which embrace the course of Hebrew history until after the Captivity , oi transplantation to Babylon . Every important particular is discussed clearly and br iefly , but not scantily , nuil the reader , though he may not accept Von
-
-
Citation
-
Leader (1850-1860), Jan. 12, 1856, page 17, in the Nineteenth-Century Serials Edition (2008; 2018) ncse2.kdl.kcl.ac.uk/periodicals/l/issues/cld_12011856/page/17/
-