THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH. 



205 



I will conclude by saying that I have never come across a Hebrew 

 scholar more capable of meeting — and heating — the critics on their 

 own ground, than the writer of this paper. He has laid the 

 Institute and all who are interested in the " saner criticism " of the 

 Hebrew Scriptures under a very heavy obligation indeed. 



The Eev. Dr. Irving writes : — 



It was refreshing to find the empirical methods of the Higher 

 Critics confronted by such an able piece of work from such a 

 thorough student of the subject, in which the methods of inductive 

 science stood out in marked contrast with the tissue of conjecture 

 and negative reasoning, which scholars of a certain Teutonic cast of 

 mind are so fond of weaving; such arguments as they adduce 

 being too often resolvable in the last resort to the " conceits " of the 

 critic himself. The more the methods of inductive science are used,, 

 the less we have to fear for the cause of Truth. 



Lecturer's Reply. 

 The Lecturer, after considering the above, replied as follows : — 



I am thankful for the highly appreciative reception of a paper 

 which is necessarily of a dry and technical character. It was a 

 pleasure to come from the utmost corner of the land to share with you 

 knowledge concerning the Word of God, and proofs of its truth 

 and authenticity which are, to my mind, unanswerable. 



We are under great obligation to Mr. Bishop for having invited 

 so many scholars with other views to hear the paper and take part 

 in the discussion. We may say that they have had the courage of 

 their convictions and have remained at home. 



To Professor Wm. H. Bennett we owe special thanks, however,, 

 because although he did not come, he wrote, referring the Institute 

 to Mr. Chapman's excellent (from its own point of view) book 

 An Introduction to the Pentateuch. But this book is quite oblivious 

 to the new facts and arguments brought forward in my 

 Samaritan Pentateuch and Modern Criticism, published by James 

 Nisbet and Co., London, 1911, so that it can hardly be said to 

 answer them. Mr. Herbert Loewe, in a signed article in the 

 Cambridge Review, recommends the impartial reader to read my work 

 along with Mr. Chapman's. 



Professor Bennett also gives references to the Church Quarterly Review^, 



