FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110  
111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   >>   >|  
mology of this sort were extremely ingenious guesses, to be admitted in so far as they do not conflict with facts, and till the next guess comes, but nothing more. Lo! they are quoted as if they were on a par with "two and two make four," or the law of Excluded Middle. We may not take Moses and the prophets without proof, but Curtius and Professor Max Mueller may speak, and we must but hear. And later, when Mr Arnold is trying to cope with Descartes, he flies for refuge to "the roots _as_, _bhu_, and _sta_." One is tempted rather to laugh at this; but on some sides it is very serious. That no God of any religion can be more of a mere hypothesis than _as_, _bhu_, and _sta_, never seems to have occurred to Mr Arnold for one moment, nor that he was cutting the throat of his own argument. We must not, however, fall into his own mistake and quadruplicate to his duply. It may be sufficient to say that the long defence of the Fourth Gospel which this book contains is one of the oddest things in all literature. What, on Mr Arnold's principles, it matters whether the Fourth Gospel was written in the first century, the fourth, or the fourteenth, it is impossible for the poor plain mind to see. He will not have it as revelation, and as anything else its date is quite immaterial. The fact is that this severe censor of "learned pseudo--science mixed with popular legend," as he terms theology, appears to have no idea of the value of evidence whatever. The traditional history of the Bible is not even to be considered; but a conjectural reconstruction of it by a Dutch critic, without in the older cases one jot or tittle of evidence outside the covers of the Bible itself, deserves every respect, if not reverent acceptance _en bloc_. Miracles are fictions, and the scenes in the garden of Eden and at the Sepulchre never happened; but _as_, _bhu_, and _sta_ are very solemn facts, and you can find out all about the Divinity, because the word Deus means (not "has been guessed to mean," but _means_) "Shining." That Shakespeare knew everything is much more certain than that miracles do not happen; and he certainly knew Mr Arnold's case if not Mr Arnold, when he introduced a certain main episode in _A Midsummer Night's Dream_. To frown on Oberon and caress Bottom is venial compared with the dismissal of the Bible as popular legend, and the implicit belief in _as_, _bhu_, and _sta_. A wilfully hostile historian of Mr Arnold could not dwel
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   98   99   100   101   102   103   104   105   106   107   108   109   110  
111   112   113   114   115   116   117   118   119   120   121   122   123   124   125   126   127   128   129   130   131   132   133   134   135   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

Arnold

 

Gospel

 

Fourth

 
evidence
 

popular

 

legend

 

respect

 
tittle
 

covers

 

acceptance


reverent

 

deserves

 
history
 

science

 

theology

 
appears
 

pseudo

 

learned

 

immaterial

 

severe


censor
 

reconstruction

 
critic
 

conjectural

 

considered

 

traditional

 

Divinity

 

Midsummer

 
episode
 

happen


introduced
 

Oberon

 

caress

 

hostile

 
wilfully
 

historian

 

belief

 

implicit

 
Bottom
 

venial


compared

 

dismissal

 

miracles

 

solemn

 
happened
 

Sepulchre

 

Miracles

 

fictions

 
scenes
 

garden