285 
in believing Him to dwell in mankind through His Spirit, — 
wrong in declaring, as they all do, that He rose from the 
dead — there seems very little left in which they were right. 
And therefore it seems altogether unnecessary to try and 
save that infinitesimal residuum from the general wreck. If 
the writers of the Old and Hew Testament were incapable and 
untrustworthy on the great majority of points on which they 
wrote, including by far the greater part of their teaching con- 
cerning Cod, and by far the greater part of their statements 
on matters of fact, it would seem more natural to discard 
them altogether, and trust to our own consciousness to evolve 
the necessary power “that makes for righteousness.'’'’ But 
if, on the other hand, there be any real significance in the 
Bible and Jesus, as Mr. Arnold says there is,* it might be 
as well to treat both with a little more respect, and inquire a 
little more carefully into the declarations contained in the 
Bible which have been so hastily cast aside. 
1 7. I can only pause to give one or two instances out of many 
of the manner in which the writers of the Old and New Testa- 
ment are dealt with. We are told that the prophecy of the 
Judgment in the 7th chapter of the Book of Daniel “was 
written in the second century before Christ,-” as though there 
could be no doubt of the fact. Not a word is said to remind 
the reader of the elaboi’ate and able treatise of Dr. Pusey on the 
Book of Daniel, in which he shows — first, that the theories 
which assign a later date to that book are the fruit of an 
a 'priori assumption that prophecy is impossible ; and next, 
that every attempt to explain the prophecy of the 490 years 
on the Maccabean theory has failed — that each has been 
raised upon the ruins of its predecessor, only to be supplanted 
by another yet more extravagant, and doomed to fail more 
hopelessly. Is it quite fair to the non-theological reader to 
give no hint of this ? The excuse can hardly serve, that Dr. 
Pusey is an unknown or a contemptible writer. Whatever 
we may think of his teaching, there is no man who has left a 
more indelible impress upon the present generation than he. 
Nor can it be contended, that this particular work is un- 
worthy of his high reputation ; for there is none of his works 
that have commanded such general admiration as this one, 
and men who on other points maintain, most strongly, views 
antagonistic to those of the learned Doctor, have expressed 
in public their strong approval of this treatise, and their deep 
* God and the Bible, Preface, p. xliii. 
u 
VOL. XII. 
