FORMS OF ATTACK 13 



ism. It is the last named which demands especial 

 attention in connection with the task undertaken in 

 these lectures, but a rapid survey of the whole field of 

 conflict seems desirable. 



(a) By rationalistic biblical criticism I mean criti- 

 cism which is controlled in method and result by the 

 presupposition that the supernatural does not need to 

 be allowed for in determining the dates, authorships, 

 texts, and truth of the several portions and teachings 

 of the Scriptures. The Scriptures may not be regarded 

 as exempt from sound criticism, which is nothing more 

 than a scientific scrutiny of their form and contents. 

 If this scrutiny is really scientific — that is, sound in 

 presuppositions and method, and adequate in the data 

 with which it reckons — no genuine truth-seeker will 

 fail to welcome it and be guided by its final results. 

 For a Christian to fear the truth in any domain is for 

 him to cause a well-grounded suspicion that he pre- 

 fers the triumph of opinions to a victory of truth. 

 No thoughtful person will attempt to justify such a 

 position. 



That many modern critics refuse to allow for super- 

 natural factors in the history of Israel, and in the pro- 

 duction of the Scriptures in the canonical form in which 

 they have come to us, is too notorious to be disputed. 

 They insist that biblical literature must be criticised 

 exactly like any other literature — that is, as deter- 

 mined in form and content by purely human causes. 

 If they are mistaken, and if it is a fact that super- 

 natural causes have been at work, and that the Scrip- 



