the lights of the church and the light of science-第3部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！



remembered　（apart　from　all　written　memorials）　for　the　space　of

150　years；　being　handed　down　through　five　generations；　it　must

be　allowed　（even　on　more　human　grounds）　that　the　account　which

Moses　gives　of　the　Temptation　and　the　Fall　is　to　be　depended

upon；　if　it　passed　through　no　more　than　four　hands　between　him

and　Adam。





If　〃the　trustworthiness　of　our　Lord　Jesus　Christ〃　is　to　stand　or

fall　with　the　belief　in　the　sudden　transmutation　of　the　chemical

components　of　a　woman's　body　into　sodium　chloride；　or　on　the

〃admitted　reality〃　of　Jonah's　ejection；　safe　and　sound；　on　the

shores　of　the　Levant；　after　three　days'　sea…journey　in　the

stomach　of　a　gigantic　marine　animal；　what　possible　pretext　can

there　be　for　even　hinting　a　doubt　as　to　the　precise　truth　of　the

longevity　attributed　to　the　Patriarchs？　Who　that　has　swallowed

the　camel　of　Jonah's　journey　will　be　guilty　of　the　affectation

of　straining　at　such　a　historical　gnatnay；　midgeas　the

supposition　that　the　mother　of　Moses　was　told　the　story　of　the

Flood　by　Jacob；　who　had　it　straight　from　Shem；　who　was　on

friendly　terms　with　Methuselah；　who　knew　Adam　quite　well？



Yet；　by　the　strange　irony　of　things；　the　illustrious　brother　of

the　divine　who　propounded　this　remarkable　theory；　has　been　the

guide　and　foremost　worker　of　that　band　of　investigators　of　the

records　of　Assyria　and　of　Babylonia；　who　have　opened　to　our

view；　not　merely　a　new　chapter；　but　a　new　volume　of　primeval

history；　relating　to　the　very　people　who　have　the　most　numerous

points　of　contact　with　the　life　of　the　ancient　Hebrews。

Now；　whatever　imperfections　may　yet　obscure　the　full　value　of

the　Mesopotamian　records；　everything　that　has　been　clearly

ascertained　tends　to　the　conclusion　that　the　assignment　of　no

more　than　4000　years　to　the　period　between　the　time　of　the

origin　of　mankind　and　that　of　Augustus　Caesar；　is　wholly

inadmissible。　Therefore　the　Biblical　chronology；　which　Canon

Rawlinson　trusted　so　implicitly　in　1859；　is　relegated　by　all

serious　critics　to　the　domain　of　fable。



But　if　scientific　method；　operating　in　the　region　of　history；　of

philology；　of　archaeology；　in　the　course　of　the　last　thirty　or

forty　years；　has　become　thus　formidable　to　the　theological

dogmatist；　what　may　not　be　said　about　scientific　method　working

in　the　province　of　physical　science？　For；　if　it　be　true　that　the

Canonical　Scriptures　have　innumerable　points　of　contact　with

civil　history；　it　is　no　less　true　that　they　have　almost　as　many

with　natural　history；　and　their　accuracy　is　put　to　the　test　as

severely　by　the　latter　as　by　the　former。　The　origin　of　the

present　state　of　the　heavens　and　the　earth　is　a　problem　which

lies　strictly　within　the　province　of　physical　science；　so　is

that　of　the　origin　of　man　among　living　things；　so　is　that　of　the

physical　changes　which　the　earth　has　undergone　since　the　origin

of　man；　so　is　that　of　the　origin　of　the　various　races　and

nations　of　men；　with　all　their　varieties　of　language　and

physical　conformation。　Whether　the　earth　moves　round　the　sun　or

the　contrary；　whether　the　bodily　and　mental　diseases　of　men　and

animals　are　caused　by　evil　spirits　or　not；　whether　there　is　such

an　agency　as　witchcraft　or　notall　these　are　purely　scientific

questions；　and　to　all　of　them　the　Canonical　Scriptures　profess

to　give　true　answers。　And　though　nothing　is　more　common　than　the

assumption　that　these　books　come　into　conflict　only　with　the

speculative　part　of　modern　physical　science；　no　assumption　can

have　less　foundation。



The　antagonism　between　natural　knowledge　and　the　Pentateuch

would　be　as　great　if　the　speculations　of　our　time　had　never　been

heard　of。　It　arises　out　of　contradiction　upon　matters　of　fact。

The　books　of　ecclesiastical　authority　declare　that　certain

events　happened　in　a　certain　fashion；　the　books　of　scientific

authority　say　they　did　not。　As　it　seems　that　this　unquestionable

truth　has　not　yet　penetrated　among　many　of　those　who　speak　and

write　on　these　subjects；　it　may　be　useful　to　give　a　full

illustration　of　it。　And　for　that　purpose　I　propose　to　deal；　at

some　length；　with　the　narrative　of　the　Noachian　Deluge　given

in　Genesis。





The　Bampton　lecturer　in　1859；　and　the　Canon　of　St。　Paul's　in

1890；　are　in　full　agreement　that　this　history　is　true；　in　the

sense　in　which　I　have　defined　historical　truth。　The　former　is　of

opinion　that　the　account　attributed　to　Berosus　records

a　tradition





not　drawn　from　the　Hebrew　record；　much　less　the　foundation　of

that　record；　yet　coinciding　with　it　in　the　most　remarkable　way。

The　Babylonian　version　is　tricked　out　with　a　few　extravagances；

as　the　monstrous　size　of　the　vessel　and　the　translation　of

Xisuthros；　but　otherwise　it　is　the　Hebrew　history　down　to　its

minutiae。　（p。　64）。





Moreover；　correcting　Niebuhr；　the　Bampton　lecturer　points　out

that　the　narrative　of　Berosus　implies　the　universality　of

the　Flood。





It　is　plain　that　the　waters　are　represented　as　prevailing　above

the　tops　of　the　loftiest　mountains　in　Armeniaa　height　which

must　have　been　seen　to　involve　the　submersion　of　all　the

countries　with　which　the　Babylonians　were　acquainted　（p。　66）。





I　may　remark；　in　passing；　that　many　people　think　the　size　of

Noah's　ark　〃monstrous；〃　considering　the　probable　state　of　the

art　of　shipbuilding　only　1600　years　after　the　origin　of　man；

while　others　are　so　unreasonable　as　to　inquire　why　the

translation　of　Enoch　is　less　an　〃extravagance〃　than　that　of

Xisuthros。　It　is　more　important；　however；　to　note　that　the

Universality　of　the　Deluge　is　recognised；　not　merely　as　a　part

of　the　story；　but　as　a　necessary　consequence　of　some　of　its

details。　The　latest　exponent　of　Anglican　orthodoxy；　as　we　have

seen；　insists　upon　the　accuracy　of　the　Pentateuchal　history　of

the　Flood　in　a　still　more　forcible　manner。　It　is　cited　as　one　of

those　very　narratives　to　which　the　authority　of　the　Founder　of

Christianity　is　pledged；　and　upon　the　accuracy　of　which　〃the

trustworthiness　of　our　Lord　Jesus　Christ〃　is　staked；　just　as

others　have　staked　it　upon　the　truth　of　the　histories　of

demoniac　possession　in　the　Gospels。



Now；　when　those　who　put　their　trust　in　scientific　methods　of

ascertaining　the　truth　in　the　province　of　natural　history　find

themselves　confronted　and　opposed；　on　their　own　ground；　by

ecclesiastical　pretensions　to　better　knowledge；　it　is；

undoubtedly；　most　desirable　for　them　to　make　sure　that　their

conclusions；　whatever　they　may　be；　are　well　founded。　And；　if

they　put　aside　the　unauthorised　interference　with　their　business

and　relegate　the　Pentateuchal　history　to　the　region　of　pure

fiction；　they　are　bound　to　assure　themselves　that　they　do　so

because　the　plainest　teachings　of　Nature　（apart　from　all

doubtful　speculations）　are　irreconcilable　with　the　assertions

which　they　reject。



At　the　present　time；　it　is　difficult　to　persuade　serious

scientific　inquirers　to　occupy　themsel