Excerpt from The Presbyterian and Reformed Review, 1895, Vol. 6
We are equally loth to assume, with Driver, that the account has been insensibly modified and freedom used in putting lan guage into the mouths -of historical characters. For, first Of all, we regard this method as unscientific. Too much room is left for the play Of mere apriorisms. We cannot See how wholly just results are possible by it. Certainly they will have none Of the stringency or claim to universal acceptance that attaches to strictly logical reasoning. Does not Kuenen himself in substance acknowledge this when he says that the historical image which we frame by it is to no small extent, the result Of our own personality, and that here, where the documents cannot possibly be taken as they stand, the influence Of one's personal peculiarities reaches its maximum It is true, if certain critics are agreed upon a theory and proceed to adjust the record to it, every fact being made to fit into its place in the assumed historic connection, that a general consensus concerning it among these critics may no doubt be achieved. But the proba bility Of its being upset by the starting Of another theory is always imminent. Nothing is more common than a change in one's his torical or philosophical standpoint. That is all that would he need ful. It would be otherwise were the basis Of agreement Objective like the credibility Of a narrative.
About the Publisher
Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at
www.forgottenbooks.comwww.forgottenbooks.com
This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works.
Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield was professor of theology at Princeton Seminary from 1887 to 1921. Some conservative Presbyterians consider him to be the last of the great Princeton theologians before the split in 1929 that formed Westminster Seminary and the Orthodox Presbyterian Church.
Warfield entered Princeton University in 1868 and graduated in 1871 with high honors. Although Warfield studied mathematics and science in college, while traveling in Europe he decided to study theology, surprising even many of his closest friends. He entered Princeton Seminary in 1873, in order to train for ministry as a Presbyterian minister. He graduated in 1876. For a short time in 1876 he preached in Presbyterian churches in Concord, Kentucky and Dayton, Ohio as a "supply pastor". In late 1876 Warfield and his new wife moved to Germany where he studied under Ernst Luthardt and Franz Delitzsch. Warfield was the assistant pastor of First Presbyterian Church in Baltimore, Maryland for a short time. Then he became an instructor at Western Theological Seminary, which is now called Pittsburgh Theological Seminary. He was ordained on April 26, 1879.
During his tenure, his primary thrust (and that of the seminary) was an authoritative view of the Bible. This view was held in contrast to the emotionalism of the revival movements, the rationalism of higher criticism, and the heterodox teachings of various New religious movements that were emerging. The seminary held fast to the Reformed confessional tradition — that is, it faithfully followed the Westminster Confession of Faith.
Warfield's view of evolution may appear unusual for a conservative of his day. He was willing to accept that Darwin's theory might be true, but believed that God guided the process of evolution, and was as such an evolutionary creationist.
... Show more