"first, when it proceeds from an age in which no ten records existed, but in which facts were trans ed through the medium of oral tradition alone; ndly, when it presents an historical account of events h are either absolutely or relatively beyond the reach xperience, such as occurrences connected with the tual world, and incidents to which, from the nature e circumstances, no one could have been witness; or lly, when it deals in the marvellous, and is couched in bolical language."2 Another (anonymous) writer 3 rves that "the closest resemblance exists between y of the narratives of the Old and New Testaments the mythi of profane antiquity." And De Wette tains the same opinion. "He advocated," we are "the mythical interpretation of a large proportion e Old Testament histories. In order to test the hisal credibility of a narrative, he says, we must ascerthe intention of the narrator. If that intention be o satisfy the natural thirst for historical truth by a le narration of facts, but rather to delight or touch eelings, or to illustrate some philosophical or reli truth, then his narrative has no pretension to histovalidity. Even when the narrator is conscious of ly historical intentions, nevertheless his point of may not be the historical: he may be a poetical narnot indeed subjectively, as a poet drawing inspirfrom himself, but objectively, as enveloped by and ading on poetry external to himself. This is evidently ase when the narrator details as bonâ-fide matter of hings which are impossible and incredible, which are ary not only to experience, but to the established laws

his Hebräische Mythologie. 2 Strauss. ut supra, § 8. 3 In Berthournal; vide Strauss, Ibid. 4 Strauss, ut supra.

its tendency is not historical, but rather patriotic and poetical. And since the patriotic sentiment is justified by all that flatters national pride, the more splendid, the more honorable, the more wonderful the narrative, the more acceptable it is; and where tradition has left any blanks, imagination at once steps in and fills them up."1 Similar views were held by Gabler, Horst, and others of the German critics; while, in this country, Theodore Parker followed in the same track. "The Jews," says this latter writer, "had their mythology as well as the Hindoos, the Goths and the Greeks. Symbols and myths," he continues, "are necessarily used by a rude people, to clothe abstract truths. It is evident the ancient Hebrews made use of them as the drapery of religious truth. This appears from the temple ceremonies, the visions and symbolic actions of the prophets, from the figurative expressions relating to the Deity, and the perpetual recurrence of anthropo-morphitic views of him. It is often difficult," he adds, "to determine where the myth begins, and the plain statement ends. But the Hebrew scriptures have this difficulty in common with all very ancient, and especially Oriental writings."'2 "The Jews," continues this writer, "never reached a high degree of culture, and always preserved a national character so peculiar, that they were, in the most striking manner, distinguished from the neighboring and contemporary nations. The belief that they were the only favorites of Jehovah, the Creator and Lord of the whole world, is as old as the nation itself; it first received a steady direction from

1 De Wette, Kritik der Mosäischen Geschichte, Einleit. s. 10 ff.; vide Strauss, ut supra.

2 Parker's De Wette, vol. ii. p. 23.

tate. They considered that Jehovah was the supreme, nvisible Governor of the nation, and that all which befell hem, in great and little affairs, was brought about by his mmediate command, and by his special contrivance and o-operation. This belief," adds Parker, "exerted so owerful an influence that all which had the remotest onnection with the body of the people and the state was ferred immediately to God."

Along with this assertion of the mythical character of e more ancient Hebrew historical writings, the same riters recognize the beginning in later times of a genuine storical era in the Hebrew historians. "These [mythogical] peculiarities," says De Wette, in a passage already oted in the preceding chapter, "are most evident in e history of the theocracy and its establishment," &c. They are the least conspicuous," he adds, "and, indeed, e scarcely perceptible, in those which belong to an age stitute of the theocratic spirit; that is, in the historical Oks of the Hagiographa." So Parker: "The dissolution the Hebrew nation, by the Assyrians and Chaldees, and -ir dispersion among many other nations, laid the foun-ion for a change in their historical views. The bond of

theocracy became looser, and when a part of the ple assembled again in their old and native land, it ld never acquire its former strictness, for the theocracy, he proper sense, was never restored. The influence of se circumstances," adds this critic, "in the historical cings, is very striking, for in the modern historical ks of the Old Testament, in Nehemiah and Ezra, the cratic-religious pragmatism no longer prevails, but the ative is constructed according to the natural laws of gs, and approaches pure historical writing."

Lil. p. 24. 2. Ibid. p. 22 3 Ibid. p. 26.

in the very words of the prominent writers of this school, lest we might do them any injustice by attempting to describe their sentiments in our own language. We shall have occasion to speak at length regarding this theory presently.

3. Received or Orthodox View. One other class of opinions respecting the character and language of the Historical Books of the Old Testament, remains to be considered. And that is the commonly-received and so-called Orthodox view of the matter. And in this case, where, as is well known, such wide differences of opinion prevail as to details, and upon minor points, it will not be possible for us to do more than give a general statement of the views commonly held.

(1) So far, then, as we have been able to gather them from the writings of modern authors of this school, these views are, that the Jewish history, as recorded in the Old Testament, differs from every other history, only in the fact that the writers of it were divinely-directed in its composition, and in the narration of facts and events, the knowledge of which they acquired in the ordinary way, by the simple employment of their faculties upon the various sources of information lying open to them. For the doctrine, once popular, "that Moses and the Biblical historians generally, received the whole contents of their works, both in matter and form, by immediate inspiration of the Holy Spirit, and not by means of tradition and indėpendent inquiry," is one, as we are assured by an eminent authority, which "learned theologians of the most rigorous orthodoxy no longer profess;' an assertion amply borne out by the following extracts from a work

1 Block, 97.

styles in which the [sacred] books are written, (obves this writer), and from the different manners in which same events are related and predicted by different hors, it appears that the sacred penmen were perted to write as the several tempers, understandings habits of life, di ected; and that the knowledge comnicated to them by inspiration on the subject of their tings was applied in the same manner as any knowle acquired by ordinary means." Again he says, hough it is evident that the sacred historians somees wrote under the immediate inspiration of the Holy rit, it does not follow that they derived from revelation knowledge of those things which might be collected n the common sources of human intelligence. It is icient to believe, that by the general superintendence the Holy Spirit, they were directed in the choice of ir materials, enlightened to judge of the truth and portance of those accounts from which they borrowed ir information" (and which he states afterwards were ounts written by uninspired men) "and prevented from ording any material error."1 The same view is held by ore recent writer upon Theology, belonging to a difent school of orthodoxy, and also occupying a high ition in the theological world. "It was sufficient,'

author instructs us, "if the Holy Spirit guided the red historian in the selection and compilation of mates already existing, supplying others by suggestion, infallibly preserving the writer from lapses of memand error of judgment; thus rendering the narrative only faithful but perfectly true, and adapted to pre

Elements of Christian Theology, by the Bishop of Winchester; d in Noble's Plenary Inspiration, p. 6, Am. Ed.