The Genuineness of the Book of Daniel asserted on Evidence
External and Internal. By J. Conway Walter, B A., Curate of Trinity Chapel, Brighton. (Longman and Co.)—It is with pleasure we recognize the temperate spirit of this little fragment of controversial theology. The author is, however, of opinion that denial of the genuineness of the Book of Daniel implies "guilt," at all events in a clergyman, a belief which of necessity prevented him from approaching his task unbiassed. The logic of the book is decidedly clerical. Our Lord showed the Sadduceea that the argument by which they pretended to disprove the doctrine of the Resurrection was founded on a misapprehension of Scripture. "It is clear, therefore, that He considered this doctrine as having been distinctly revealed in the Old Testament." It does not the least follow. It does follow that He considered it to have been revealed—but the distinctness is a mere figment, and it is on this that Mr. Walter's presumption, such as it is, in favour of the genuineness of
Daniel is founded. Neither does Mr. Walter seem to see that in proving the accuracy of the Book he does nothing for its genuineness. The third part, in which he treats of the historical testimony, tracing the existence of the Book of Daniel up to a time when forgery would be impossible, is really to the point. On the whole, however, this work is a useful con- tribution, from the orthodox point of view, to the controversy—on which we, of course, express no opinion, and, indeed, hardly expect to be able to do so, till theologians have learnt what conclusion can be de- duced from given premises—all accomplishment which is equally wanting both to the sceptical and orthodox disputants.
Previous page
