The Book of God : In the Light of the Higher Criticism: With Special Reference to Dean Farrar's New Apology — John Shaqi
The Book of God : In the Light of the Higher Criticism: With Special Reference to Dean Farrar's New ApologyFoote, G. W. (George William)
Religion
The Book of God : In the Light of the Higher Criticism: With Special Reference to Dean Farrar's New Apology
Foote, G. W. (George William)
Bible -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.; Farrar, F. W. (Frederic William), 1831-1903. New apology
Dr. Giles--another ignored writer, although a clergyman of the Church
of England--had said and proved the very same thing in his _Christian
Records_; and had appended the following significant declaration:--
"There is positive proof, in the writings of the first ages of
Christianity, that the same question as to the age and authorship of the
books of the New Testament was even then agitated, and if it was then
set at rest, this was done, not by a deliberate sentence of the judge,
but by burning all the evidence on which one side of the controversy was
supported,"**
* Arnold, God and the Bible, pp. 222-3.
** Dr. Giles, Christian Records, p. 10.
It is probable that Dr. Farrar is well aware that our Four Gospels
cannot be traced beyond the second half of the second century--that is,
considerably more than a century after the alleged date of the death of
Christ. But he shrinks from a frank admission of the fact, and leaves
the reader to find it out for himself.
Instead of making this important and, as some think, damning admission,
Dr. Farrar continues his remarks on the Bible Canon. That thirty-six
books are accepted "on the authority of the Church" simply means,
he tells us, that they are accepted "by the general consensus of
Christians." The whole Church, as such, has hardly pronounced an
opinion on the subject. The Churchmen who voted at Laodicea and Carthage
"exercised no independent judgment," and their critical knowledge was
"elementary." Nor was the decision of the Council of Trent any real
improvement. Dr. Farrar approves the reply of the Reformed Churches,
that "any man may reject books claiming to be Holy Scripture if he do
not feel the evidence of their contents." But this is to make every man
a judge, not only of what the Bible means, but also of what it should
contain. Each unfettered Christian may therefore make up a Bible for
himself; which is simply chaos come again. What then is the way of
escape from this grotesque confusion? Dr. Farrar indicates it with a
crooked finger:--
"The decision as to what books are or are not to be regarded as true
Scripture, though we believe it to be wise and right, depends on no
infallible decision. It must satisfy the scientific and critical as well
as the spiritual requirements of each age."
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account