Eurasians -- Fiction; India -- History -- British occupation, 1765-1947 -- Fiction
“First, as to the authenticity of the Bible. The authors were men, not
differing from other men, with limited faculties, fallible as all men
are, and liable to mistakes. They may have been honest, with the best of
intentions, yet this is no warrant that they could not be mistaken. It
is evident that they were affected by the times in which they lived,
were influenced by their surroundings, and directed by their education,
though very meager. It is well authenticated that the writers never
wrote all that is attributed to them; that many things were interpolated
by others, several centuries later, to make up a creed for the church to
suit themselves. It is not known just when the Bible was written, nor
the authors of the different parts, or whether any one part was written
wholly by the one to whom it is ascribed, or afterward compiled from
various sources. It is well known that there were many writings, and
that those now composing the Bible are selections from them all. If any
were inspired, why not all? If all were from God, why should some be
chosen and others rejected? It was a daring, sacrilegious thing to do,
men becoming the judges of the revelations of God, that is, if they
believed they were from God. There must have been doubts about the
authenticity of them. If there were doubts about some, why not about
others, about all? If men in ancient times, no better or worse than we
are, could have their doubts and make their choice of what they supposed
to be the word of God, why should we not have the same right to use our
judgments? In fact, the knowledge of every kind that the world has
acquired, the distance from the events recorded, uninfluenced by the
prejudices and associations affecting the writers of the books of the
Bible and those making the selections, make men of modern times more
capable of considering what is truth and what might be considered the
word of God. Scientists of all kinds do not accept all the ancient
theories, not because they are indisposed to do so, but for the
indisputable reason that these theories or dogmas do not harmonize with
the truth or demonstrated facts.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account