t while
yet their processes are incomplete: and it is the hope and firm belief
of many God-fearing scientists that the patient, reverent searching of
to-day into God's works, of matter and of mind, as it collects the
myriad facts and classifies them into such orderly sequences as indicate
the laws of their being, will confirm to men's reason their faith in the
revealed Word. Certainly this is a consummation devoutly to be wished. I
am not scientist enough to judge of its probability, but it is within my
province to present a few deductions which can be fairly drawn from the
denial of the inspiration of the Mosaic Code. I wish to show to what
conclusions this denial logically leads.
We must remember that Moses himself most distinctly and most
emphatically affirms his own divine legation; for is not almost every
chapter prefaced with these remarkable words, "And the Lord spake unto
Moses"? Jehovah himself, in some incomprehensible way, amid the
lightnings and the wonders of the sacred Mount, communicated His wisdom.
Now, if we disbelieve this direct and impressive affirmation made by
Moses,--that Jehovah directed him what to say to the people he was
called to govern,--why should we believe his other statements, which
involve supernatural agency or influence pertaining to the early history
of the race? Where, then, is his authority? What is it worth? He has
indeed no authority at all, except so far as his statements harmonize
with our own definite knowledge, and perhaps with scientific
speculations. We then make our own reason and knowledge, not the
declarations of Moses, the ultimate authority. As a divine oracle to us,
his voice is silent; ay, his august voice is drowned by the discordant
and contradictory opinions that are ever blended with the speculations
of the schools. He tells us, in language of the most impressive
simplicity and grandeur, that he _was_ directly instructed and
commissioned by Jehovah to communicate moral truths,--truths, we should
remember, which no one before him is known to have uttered, and truths
so important that the prosperity of nations is identified with them, and
will be so identified as long as men shall speculate and dream. If we
deny this testimony, then his narration of other facts, which we accept,
is not to be fully credited; like other ancient histories, it may be and
it may not be true,--but there is no certainty. However we may interpret
his detailed narration of the genesis of o
|