A REALLY INFALLIBLE BOOK!
ITO THE ED/TOR OF THE " SPEOTATOR.1
SIR,—In your issue of the 12th, Mr. Martineau proposes an inter- pretation of the opening verses of Genesis as being the only possible or grammatical one, and as "satisfying such first-rate -scholars as Rashi and Ewald." Per contra, Dr. Pusey, in his "Lectures on Daniel" (pref. xix.), pronounces this identical expla- nation of "Ewald from Bashi" to be contrary to Hebrew idiom and to Hebrew grammar,—" So would no Hebrew have written, so could no reader understand it," Stc., &c. Dr. Pusey also gives a -quotation from Kurtz agreeing with his own exegesis. Moreover, the Bishop of Ely, in the Speaker's Commentary (vol. i., p. 32) explains the passage as Dr. Pusey does.
So that here we have, on the one hand, three "first-rate scholars" insisting on a certain translation as being the only one that is possible, grammatical, or true ; and on the other hand, we have three not inferior scholars rejecting that translation as being unnatural, artificial, and false !—and who is there to tell us which of the two statements we are to believe? Indeed, considering that our Lord seems to have disdained both of them, perhaps it is not very much matter which of the two developments we Chris- tians adopt, or whether we adopt neither; but then, if indecision
or unbelief be no crime as regards this verse in Genesis, how or why can indecision or unbelief be a crime as regards any other verse in the Bible? And if decision and belief be not required, what is the meaning of an Infallible Book? (Oh! how we Bible- idolising Protestants would jibe at the "wretched Papists," if we could bring up some similar diversity of interpretation of a modern ex cathedrd pronouncement !) And to say one word more on this subject, can you help us to decide whether our Lord or the Authorised Version is right as to the early Genealogy-Chronology of Genesis? He adopted the Septuagint Version, and thereby (as we are told by all who write against Colenso) made Himself responsible for all its statements ; but Archbishop Ussher and the "authorised "marginal chronology pronounce the Septuagint computation to be astray mirum in modum! There was an uproar when Colenso and Stanley denied Christ's omniscience, and is it nothing that Ussher, Pusey, and the Authorised Version should do the same thing ?—I am, Sir, &c., St. Bride's, Dublin, October 16, 1872. W. G. CARROLL.
Previous page
