who first applied the term to Old Testament study, has this
to say: "I have been obliged to bestow the greatest {77} amount of
labor on a hitherto entirely unworked field: the investigation of the
inner constitution of the separate books of the Old Testament by the
aid of the higher criticism, _a new name to no humanist_."[6]

Once more: the higher criticism as such is not opposed to traditional
views. In the words of Professor Zenos: "Its relation to the old and
the new views respectively is one of indifference. It may result in
the confirmation of the old, or in the substitution of the new for the
old.... It is no respecter of antiquity or novelty; its aim is to
discover and verify the truth, to bring facts to light whether these
validate or invalidate previously held opinions."[7] It is a grave
mistake, therefore, to attribute to higher criticism an essentially
destructive purpose. In reality, it has confirmed traditional views at
least as often as it has shown them to be untenable. It does not
approach its investigations even with a suspicion of the correctness of
tradition; it starts out with the tradition, it accepts it as correct
until the process of investigation has brought to light facts and
indications which cannot be harmonized with tradition. In such a case
criticism believes itself bound to supply a satisfactory explanation of
the facts, though such explanation may be contrary to the claims of
tradition. Any student Who approaches the inquiry in a spirit {78}
different from that here indicated introduces into his investigation
elements that are not a part of higher criticism as such, and the
latter cannot and should not be held accountable for them.

That it is desirable to answer questions concerning the origin, form,
and value of biblical books no one will dispute. C. M. Mead,
exceedingly cautious and conservative, says: "I regard the higher
criticism as not only legitimate but as useful, and indiscriminate
condemnation of it as foolish. Genuine criticism is nothing but the
search after truth, and of this there cannot be too much."[8] No
literary production in the Bible or outside of the Bible can be fully
understood unless the interpreter has a full knowledge of its origin,
its author, and its first readers. When, where, by whom, to whom,
under what circumstances, for what purpose?--an answer to these and
similar questions will wonderfully illuminate the message of a book. A
knowledge of t