8
1
8
download/literature/watchtower/1905-10.pdf
../literature/watchtower/1905/10/1905-10-1.html
VOL.
XXVI
ALLEGHENY,
P
A.,
MAY
15,
1905
VIEWS
FROM
THE
WATCH
TOWER
No.
10
THE
WRONG-HEADEDNESS
OF
HIGHER
CRITICISM
'higher
critics,'
nor
by
a
still
greater
refinement
of
philo
logic-
Emil
Reich,
a
Hungarian
writer.
discussing
and
contra·
al
methods-this
initial
fault
has
vitiated
and
will
vitiate
all
dicting
the
conclusions
of
Higher
Critics,
in
the
ContemporQlT'Y
modern
hypercriticism
of
ancient
records.
Nor
is
there
any
Remew,
says,-"The
complete
wrong-headedness
of
the
whole
particular
difficulty
in
finding
out
the
true
nature
of
this
method
of
higher
criticism
cannot
fail
to
be
manifest
to
any-
fault.
It
is
this:
The
history
of
the
ancient
nations
must
body
who
bases
his
judgment
upon
the
true
essence
of
the
be
constructed
not
on
the
basis
of
the
philological
study
of
matter
in
dispute,
and
not
upon
mere
externals.
their
records,
but
mainly
on
the
basis
of
considerations
of
"Some
of
the
latest
samples
of
philological
jugglery
with
geography,
or,
as
the
present
writer
has
ventured
to
call
it,
which
the
public
has
been
duped
are
too
amusll~g
t?
~e
of
geo-politics.
What
made
the
few
tribes,
'Semitic'
or
other,
omitted.
If
only
read
from
the
humorous
standpomt,
It
IS
in
Palestine,
Syria,
and
Phenicia,
so
important
a
factor
in
hIS
doubtful
whether
any
book
could
afford
a
merrier
half-hour
tory
was
neither
their
language
nor
their
'race.'
The
Hebrews
than
one
of
the
latest
achievements
of
Prof.
Hugo
and
the
Phenicians
have
indeed
played
in
history
a
role
of
the
Winckler-two
volumes
in
which
he
finally
dissolves
into
first
magnitude.
So
have
even
in
a
greater
measure,
the
myth
the
small
portion
of
Jewish
history
which
had
heen
Hellens.
All
the
three
were-and
this
is
the
capital
POint
mercifully
left
to
us.
Listen
a
while,
and
you
shall
hear
-border-nations
proper.
They
lived
on
the
great
line
of
fric
how
Jewish
traditien
is
a
mere
flimsy
plagiarism
of
Ha.bylo-
tion
between
the
powerful
and
civilized
inland
empires
of
nian
myths.
Among
the
general
ma.ssacre
of
Biblical
perbon-
Assyria,
Babylon,
Egypt,
the
Hittites,
the
Phrygians,
the
alities
we
can
only
mention
a
few
of
the
victims.
What
per-
Lydians,
etc.
All
these
inland
empires
necessarily,
and
as
a
Ron
has
hitherto
been
more
historical
than
Joseph
T
But
to
matter
of
history.
gravitated
toward
the
'Great
Sea'
of
the
Professor
Winckler
he
IS
an
obvious
astral
myth,
for
in
the
Mediterranean;
all
the
peoples
on
the
'line'
between
the
43d
chapter
of
Genesis,
verse
5,
does
he
not
come
at
noon?
Mediterranean
and
the
territories
of
the
conflicting
empires
And
is
not
this
clear
enough
proof
that
he
is
a
mere
persolli-
were
then
necessarily
exposed
to
the
maximum
of
friction,
fication
of
the
sun?
Besides,
if
we
are
disposed
to
f!.oubt,
we
danger,
and
deeply
agitated
activity.
'11lOse
nations
were
must
recollect
that
Joseph
dreamed
that
the
sun,
moon,
and
called
the
Hellenes,
the
Phenicians,
the
Hebrews,
the
Edom
eleven
stars
bowed
down
to
him;
and
whom
should
they
bow
ites,
etc.
Being
in
imminent
danger
of
absorption
at
the
to
save
the
sun?
Joshua,
too,
is
the
sun.
For
he
is
the
son
hands
of
the
empires,
those
nations
could
not
but
see,
and
of
Nun,
and
does
not
Nun,
being
interpreted,
mean
fish?
fmd
did
see,
that
they
could
protect
themselves
with
success
only
does
not
the
sun
at
the
spring
equinox
issue
from
the
constel-
by
having
recourse
either
to
the
immense
leverage
of
sea
lation
of
Pisces?
What
could
be
more
conclusive?
Besidcl'
power,
which
the
empires
did
not
possess;
or
by
energizing
does
it
not
amply
explain
why
Joshua's
companion
is
Ualell
T
themselves
both
intellectually
and
politically
to
a
degree
Now
Caleb
is
Kaleb,
and
Kaleb
is
Kelb,
and
Kelb
is
It
do~.
So
much
more
intense
than
the
empires
had
eVer
done.
Accord
of
course
Caleb
is
clearly
put
for
the
dog
star
Sirius."
This,
ingly
some
of
them
were
forced
to
lay
extraordinary
premiums
as
he
suggests,
is
"philology
run
mad"
and
"utter
miscon-
on
higher
intellect
and
spiritual
growth,
by
means
of
which
ception."
they
resisted
the
more
massive
onslaught
of
the
intellectually
"The~'
imagine
because
they
have
been
able
to
trace
!;imi-
inferior
empires
That
gigantic
intellectual
struggles,
larities,
or
even
identities,
between
the
purely
external
phe-
such
as
those
border
nations
were
forced
to
undertake
or
nomena
of
Judaism
or
of
Christianity
and
the
religious
cere-
else
perish,
can
not
be
conducted
without
personalities
of
the
mOlllals
of
ancient
Babylonia,
that
they
have
thereby
proved
first
order,
only
a
mere
text-critic
ean
doubt.
One
may
deny
that
Christianity
and
Judaism
are
nothing
but
cribs
of
whllt
the
existence
of
the
Jews;
but
once
their
existence
is
con
the
Babylonians
long
before
possessed."
But
"within
the
lll~t
ceded
one
can
not
deny
the
existence
of
Moses.
One
may
deny
few
weeks
matter
has
been
published
which
should
fina.lly
turn
the
existence
of
the
Carthusians;
but
once
their
existence,
th
h'
he
riti
out
of
the
position
in
which
they
Have
been
i.
e.,
their
secular
spiritual
struggle
with
all
the
forces
of
so
e
lo~~
c~~for;:blY
entrenched."
life
is
admitted,
one
can
not
possibly
deny
the
historic
exist-
Reference
is
here
made
to
the
recent
discovery
in
east
ence
of
St.
Bruno.
One
may
minimize,
or
doubt
the
Reforma
Africa,
of
an
obscure
trIbe
of
negroes,
whose
religiou,
myths
tion;
but
certainly
not
Luther.
Higher
criticism
has
arrived
and
traditions
show
an
extraordinary
simIlarity
to
thos'!
of
at
its
final
term:
bankruptcy."
the
Hebrew
Scriptures.
Herr
Reich
argues
that
this
confirms
POPE
PIUS
X.
AND
FRANCE
the
thought
that
Babylonia
and
other
lands
possessing
such
The
conflict
between
the
French
government
and
the
Pope
religious
foundations
got
them
from
the
Hebrew;
contradicting
continues
and
is
expected
soon
to
result
in
the
dissolution
the
"higher
critical
thought"
that
the
Hebrew
ideas
on
relig-
of
the
"Concordat"
and
thus
in
a
complete
separation
of
ious
subjects
were
but
a
rehash
of
what
the
people
of
Babylo-
church
and
state
in
France.
The
"Concordat"
is
an
agree
nia
possessed
long,
long
before
Moses'
day.
Continuing
on
ment
in
writing
under
which
France
is
bound
to
support
and
this
line
he
says:
defend
Roman
Catholicism
in
France
and
to
some
extent
its
"Arabia,
at
all
times
the
'store
chamber
of
nations,'
was
missions,
etc.,
in
foreign
lands.
In
consideration
of
this
the
never
able
to
feed
her
untold
thousands
of
hardy,
beautiful,
papacy
acknowledges
the
right
of
the
French
government
to
gifted
people.
Accordingly,
they
emigrated
in
all
directions,
have
a
voice
in
determining
who
mayor
may
not
be
the
as
they
did
in
the
times
of
Mohammed
and
at
other
times.
bishops,
arch-bishops
and
cardinals
of
France.
Thousnnds
of
years
before
Christ
a
stock
of
religious
and
The
present
trouble,
it
will
be
remembered,
began
WIth
other
legends
had
grown
up
among
them
about
the
great
rid-
the
determination
of
the
French
to
put
their
schools
on
a
dies
of
the
world.
This
they
carried
into
their
new
countries;
higher
level,
to
accomplish
which,
necessitated
the
prohibiting
and
thus
the
Babylonians,
the
Hebrews,
the
Masai,
and
very
of
further
teaching
by
Jesuits,
nuns
and
others
of
monastic
probably
many
another
now
unknown
tribe
from
Arabia,
orders,
in
their
official
garbs,
etc.
In
other
words
France
whether
in
Persia.
Afghanistan.
Beluchistan,
or
India,
pre-
wanted
such
free
schools
as
have
so
greatly
profited
the
peo
served.
and
still
preserves
the
legends
about
creation,.
the
de-
pIe
of
the
United
States.
This
led
to
wordy-strife.
many
luge,
the
decalogue,
etc.,
in
their
aboriginal
form.
It
is
just
ecclesiastics
attacking
and
denouncing
the
Government.
These
as
possible,
with
purely
philological
arguments,
to
deduce
the
in
turn
were
opposed
by
the
Government
which
speaking
for
Masai
legends
from
Hebrew
stories
as
it
is
to
deduce
Hebrew
the
majority
of
the
people,
declared
such
strife
to
be
against
legends
from
Babylonian
myths.
Or,
to
put
it
in
a
different
France,
and
some
of
the
bitterest,
accused
of
llittempts
to
fashion,
the
same
philological
arguments
that
have
served
to
foment
rebellion
and
civil
commotion
were
expelled
from
the
declare
the
Hebrew
legends
as
mere
copies
of
Babylonian
country.
myths,
may
now
be
employed
in
proving
that
all
the
Hebrew
As
one
bishopric
after
another
became
vacant
and
a
suc
legev.ds
are
of
Masai
origin,
or
vice
versa.
This
ab'lolute
l'essor
was
nominated
by
the
Pope
he
was
seen
to
be
of
the
inability
of
the
philological
method
of
higher
criticism
to
de-
bitter
anti-France
kind
and
was
refused
under
the
terms
of
ciele
definitely
which
is
the
parent
and
which
the
child,
at
the
"Concordat."
The
Pope
has
refused
to
nominate
other
once
condemns
it."
.
.
.
.
.
bi~hops
more
acceptable
to
the
French
until
now
ten
bish·
"It
is
evident
that
philological
reasoning
which
brings
us
april'S
or
sees
are
vacant,
and
the
Catholic
populations
of
to
results
which
are
so
little
permanent
results,
which
are
ab-
the
same
ar~,
it
is
claimed,
suffering
"spiritual
deprivations"
solntely
overturned
by
the
first
chance
discovery,
must
have
as
a
consequence.
We
doubt
this,
but
it
is
a
cause
for
con
something
fundamentally
wrong
in
it.
This
fundamental
and
tinued
and
increasing
friction.
initial
vice,
quod
tractu
temporM
convalescere
nequit
[whil'h
France
is
firm
and
declares
she
will
cut
the
"Concordat"
the
lapse
of
time
cannot
heall,
which
can
be
cured
by
the
knot
and
be
free
to
manage
her
own
church
affairs--either
moderation
and
soberness
of
Hommel,
who
together
with
a
paying
such
priests
and
bishops,
etc.,
as
she
chooses
or
leav
few
other
historians,
has
not
yet
given
in
to
the
claims
of
the
ing
them
as
in
the
United
States
to
be
supported
by
the
[3557]
047-148)
Vout. XXVI ALLEGHENY, PA., MAY 15, 1905 No. 10 VIEWS FROM THE WATCH TOWER THE WRONG-HEADEDNESS OF HIGHER CRITICISM Emil Reich, a Hungarian writer, discussing and contradicting the conclusions of Higher Critics, in the Contemporary Review, says,—‘The complete wrong-headedness of the whole method of higher criticism cannot fail to be manifest to anybody who bases his judgment upon the true essence of the matter in dispute, and not upon mere externals, . “Some of the latest samples of philological jugglery with which the public has been duped are too amusing to be omitted. If only read from the humorous standpoint, it is doubtful whether any book could afford a merrier half-hour than one of the latest achievements of Prof. Hugo Winckler—two volumes in which he finally dissolves into myth the small portion of Jewish history which had heen mercifully left to us. Listen a while, and you shall hear how Jewish tradition is a mere flimsy plagiarism of Babylonian myths. Among the general massacre of Biblical personalities we can only mention a few of the victims. What person has hitherto been more historical than Joseph? But to Professor Winckler he 1s an obvious astral myth, for in the 43d chapter of Genesis, verse 5, does he not come at noon? And is not this clear enough proof that he is a mere personification of the sun? Besides, if we are disposed to doubt, we must recollect that Joseph dreamed that the sun, moon, and eleven stars bowed down to him; and whom should they bow to save the sun? Joshua, too, is the sun. For he is the son of Nun, and does not Nun, being interpreted, mean fish? and does not the sun at the spring equinox issue from the constellation of Pisces? What could be more conclusive? Besides does it not amply explain why Joshua’s companion is Caleb? Now Caleb is Kaleb, and Kaleb is Kelb, and Kelb is a dog. So of course Caleb is clearly put for the dog star Sirius.” This, as he suggests, is “philology run mad” and “utter misconception.” “They imagine because they have been able to trace similarities, or even identities, between the purely external phenomena of Judaism or of Christianity and the religious ceremonials of ancient Babylonia, that they have thereby proved that Christianity and Judaism are nothing but cribs of what the Babylonians long before possessed.” But ‘within the last few weeks matter has been published which should finally turn the higher critics out of the position in which they Have been so long comfortably entrenched.” Reference is here made to the recent discovery in east Africa, of an obscure tribe of negroes, whose religious myths and traditions show an extraordinary similarity to those of the Hebrew Scriptures. Herr Reich argues that this confirms the thought that Babylonia and other lands possessing such religious foundations got them from the Hebrew; contradicting the “higher critical thought” that the Hebrew ideas on religious subjects were but a rehash of what the people of Babylonia possessed long, long before Moses’ day. Continuing on this line he says: “Arabia, at all times the ‘store chamber of nations,’ was never able to feed her untold thousands of hardy, beautiful, gifted people. Accordingly, they emigrated in all directions, as they did in the times of Mohammed and at other times. Thousands of years before Christ a stock of religious and other legends had grown up among them about the great riddles of the world. This they carried into their new countries; and thus the Babylonians, the Hebrews, the Masai, and very probably many another now unknown tribe from Arabia, whether in Persia, Afghanistan, Beluchistan, or India, preserved, and still preserves the legends about creation, the deluge, the decalogue, etc., in their aboriginal form. It is just as possible, with purely philological arguments, to deduce the Masai legends from Hebrew stories as it is to deduce Hebrew legends from Babylonian myths. Or, to put it in a different fashion, the same philological arguments that have served to declare the Hebrew legends as mere copies of Babylonian myths, may now be employed in proving that all the Hebrew legends are of Masai origin, or vice versa. ‘This absolute inability of the philologica] method of higher criticism to decide definitely which is the parent and which the child, at once condemns it.” ..... “It is evident that philological reasoning which brings us to results which are so little permanent results, which are absolutely overturned by the first chance discovery, must have something fundamentally wrong in it. This fundamental and initial vice, quod tractu temporis convalescere nequit [which the lapse of time cannot heal], which can be cured by the moderation and soberness of Hommel, who together with a few other historians, has not yet given in to the claims of the [3557] ‘higher critics,’ nor by a still greater refinement of philological methods—this initial fault has vitiated and will vitiate all modern hypercriticism of ancient records. Nor is there any particular difficulty in finding out the true nature of this fault. 1t is this: The history of the ancient nations must be constructed not on the basis of the philological study of their records, but mainly on the basis of considerations of geography, or, as the present writer has ventured to call it, of geo-politics, What made the few tribes, ‘Semitic’ or other, in Palestine, Syria, and Phenicia, so important a factor in history was neither their language nor their ‘race.’ The Hebrews and the Phenicians have indeed played in history a role of the first magnitude. So have even in a greater measure, the Hellens. All the three were—and this is the capital point —hborder-nations proper. They lived on the great line of friction between the powerful and civilized inland empires of Assyria, Babylon, Egypt, the Hittites, the Phrygians, the Lydians, ete. All these inland empires necessarily, and as a matter of history. gravitated toward the ‘Great Sea’ of the Mediterranean; all the peoples on the ‘line’ between the Mediterranean and the territories of the conflicting empires were then necessarily exposed to the maximum of friction, danger, and deeply agitated activity. ‘Those nations were called the Hellenes, the Phenicians, the Hebrews, the Edomites, etc. Being in imminent danger of absorption at the hands of the empires, those nations could not but see, and did see, that they could protect themselves with success only by having recourse either to the immense leverage of seapower, which the empires did not possess; or by energizing themselves both intellectually and politically to a degree much more intense than the empires had ever done. Accordingly some of them were forced to lay extraordinary premiums on higher intellect and spiritual growth, by means of which they resisted the more massive onslaught of the intellectually inferior empires. ..... That gigantic intellectual struggles, such as those border nations were forced to undertake or else perish, can not be conducted without personalities of the first order, only a mere text-critic can doubt. One may deny the existence of the Jews; but once their existence is conceded one can not deny the existence of Moses. One may deny the existence of the Carthusians; but once their existence, i. e., their secular spiritual struggle with all the forces of life is admitted, one can not possibly deny the historic existence of St. Bruno. One may minimize, or doubt the Reformation; but certainly not Luther. Higher criticism has arrived at its final term: bankruptcy.” POPE PIUS X. AND FRANCE The conflict between the French government and the Pope continues and is expected soon to result in the dissolution of the “Concordat” and thus in a complete separation of church and state in France. The “Concordat” is an agreement in writing under which France is bound to support and defend Roman Catholicism in France and to some extent its missions, etc., in foreign lands. In consideration of this the papacy acknowledges the right of the French government to have a voice in determining who may or may not be the bishops, arch-bishops and cardinals of France. The present trouble, it will be remembered, began with the determination of the French to put their schools on a higher level, to accomplish which, necessitated the prohibiting of further teaching by Jesuits, nuns and others of monastic orders, in their official garbs, ete. In other words France wanted such free schools as have so greatly profited the people of the United States. This led to wordy-strife, many ecclesiastics attacking and denouncing the Government. These in turn were opposed by the Government which speaking for the majority of the people, declared such strife to be against France, and some of the bitterest, accused of attempts to foment rebellion and civil commotion were expelled from the country. As one bishopric after another became vacant and a successor was nominated by the Pope he was seen to be of the bitter anti-France kind and was refused under the terms of the “Concordat.” The Pope has refused to nominate other bishops more acceptable to the French until now ten bishoprics or sees are vacant, and the Catholic populations of the same are, it is claimed, suffering “spiritual deprivations” as a consequence. We doubt this, but it is a cause for continued and increasing friction. France is firm and declares she will cut the “Concordat” knot and be free to manage her own church affairs—either paying such priests and bishops, etc., as she chooses or leaving them as in the United States to be supported by the (147-148)
Pentru a vă îmbunătăți experiența pe site-ul nostru, folosim cookies și tehnologii similare. Unele cookies sunt esențiale pentru funcționalitatea de bază a site-ului nostru și nu pot fi refuzate. Puteți alege să acceptați sau să refuzați cookies suplimentare. Vrem să vă asigurăm că aceste date nu vor fi vândute sau utilizate în scopuri de marketing. Puteți ajusta preferințele dvs. în orice moment accesând Setările de Confidențialitate din subsolul paginii. Pentru mai multe informații, vă rugăm să consultați
Politica de Confidențialitate
Condiții de utilizare
.
