he form of the writing is also essential to a proper
understanding of the same. Is it history or poetry? is it narrative or
prediction? or any one of the various kinds of literature? In a
similar manner it is important, though not always easy, to know the
value a given literary work was intended to have. Is it to be
understood as literal history? Is its essential purpose didactic,
without special regard for historic accuracy in {79} every detail? Are
the religious and ethical truths taught intended to be final, or do
they mark a stage in the development toward perfection and finality?
These and other important questions of a similar nature the higher
criticism seeks to answer.

Some one may say, "Scholars in all ages have sought to answer these
questions; why is it, then, that modern higher criticism reaches
conclusions concerning the origin, form, and value of Old Testament
writings not dreamed of a few centuries ago?" This is a legitimate
question, but the answer is not far to seek. It may best be answered
by asking another question: Men in all ages have studied the earth, the
sun, the stars, and other phenomena of nature; how is it that modern
scientists have reached conclusions unknown and undreamed of a few
centuries ago? The modern higher criticism, like all modern science,
is the outgrowth of the awakening during the Middle Ages which
revolutionized the whole world of science, literature, and religion.
The Renaissance aroused men's interest in literature and science, the
Reformation aroused men's interest in religion as a personal
experience. In the Renaissance men began to think for themselves in
matters of science and literature; in the Reformation they began to
think for themselves in matters of religion. It was inevitable that
{80} the awakening of thought and the substitution of reason for
authority in science, secular literature, and secular history should
ultimately affect sacred history and sacred literature as well.[9]

Chronologically, it is true, the work of higher criticism began even
before the time of the Renaissance among Spanish Jews. But this Jewish
criticism did not at the time exert any influence in the Christian
Church. Only after criticism had secured a foothold among Christian
scholars were the results of Jewish investigation made use of. In the
same way the purely negative conclusions of some of the early Christian
heretics, based upon dogmatic considerations rather than histo