MODEEN BIBLICAL SCHOLARSHIP. 



245 



not quite clear to me indeed that the snake is a snake, or anything 

 more than a dividing line to show how the cylinder was to be 

 placed when an impression was to be taken. Nor is it certain that 

 either of the two figures is intended to be a woman. Moreover, 

 they are both clothed, an important difference from the narrative in 

 Genesis, and neither has taken the fruit from the tree, nor is giving 

 it to the other ; both are in exactly the same attitude. I therefore 

 think it very doubtful whether we have the right to assume 

 that there is any reference to the story of the Fall. 



Mr. John Schwartz, Jun., described the paper as "able special 

 pleading," and said the real conclusions of archaeology were against 

 the Lecturer, that evolution of morality and the spiritual was proved 

 all along the lines, that the degradation theory of savages was 

 exploded, and that the Jews, like others, had developed in the same 

 way as other early peoples, and that the prophets alone could be said 

 to be inspired. 



After a few remarks from Professor Langhorne Orchard — 



Eev. W. R. Whately said : There are two points raised by a 

 previous speaker on which I should like to say a few words. He 

 referred to the degeneration of savages as an exploded theory. I 

 should rather describe it as (in some instances) a demonstrated fact. 

 I believe that the Australian aborigines speak a language which must 

 have been developed by ancestors in a higher state of civilization 

 than the present race. 



Secondly he spoke of the evolution of an ethical monotheistic 

 religion in Israel as an instance of the general law of religions. The 

 " general law ! " Where is there another instance, apart from the 

 Bible, of an ethical monotheistic religion 1 There is absolutely none. 

 So far from being an instance of a general law, the appearance of 

 such a religion in Israel is absolutely unique. Nor does the suppo- 

 sition of a gradual evolution from lower forms of religion render 

 it any less unique. 



Rev. John Tuckwell in reply said : Mr. Chairman and ladies 

 and gentlemen, I beg to thank you very cordially for the appreciation 

 with which you have received my paper. The little criticism it has 

 received will not need any lengthy reply. With regard to our 

 Chairman's remarks, the use of the word " modern " in the title shows 

 the limitation of the professed scholarship with which it deals. The 

 existence of other Biblical scholarships I have clearly recognized on 



