viii PKKI 



a sort of "inspiration with limited liability," tin- 

 limit K-ing susceptible of indefinite fluctuation in 

 correspondence with the demands of scientific 

 criticism. Where this advances that at once 

 ats. 



This Parthian policy is carried out with sum, 

 y; but, like other such manoeuvres in the 

 of a strong foe, it seems likely to end in 

 disaster. It is easy to say, and sounds plausible, 

 that the Bible was not meant to teach any thin- 

 but ethics and religion, and that its utterances on 

 other matters are mere obiter dicta; it is also a 

 specious suggestion that inspiration, filtering 

 through human brains, must undergo a kind of 

 fallibility contamination ; and that this human 

 impurity is responsible for any errors, the exist- 

 ence of which has to be admitted, however 

 unwillingly. 



But how does the apologist know what the bib- 

 lical writers intended to teach, and what they did 

 not intend to teach ? And even it' their authority 

 is restricted to matters of faith and morals, who is 

 pivpan-d to deny that the story of the fabrication 

 of Eve, that of the lapse from innocence effected 

 by a talking snake, that of the Deluge and the 

 demonological le^-nds, have exercised, and still 

 -is.-, a profound influence on Christian theo- 

 logy and Christian ethics? The very apologists 

 \\ho put forth this plea are never weary of 

 declaring that the Divine authority for the moral 

 toundation of ethics. But if 



