The Fundamentals - Torrey - VIII - Chapter 7 (Old Testament criticism and New Testament Christianity)

Required reading
The Fundamentals edited by R. A. Torrey (Available from Amazon or free here) - Read Chapter 7 'Old Testament criticism and New Testament Christianity'.

My summary
This week Griffith Thomas weighs into the debate on higher criticism with eight challenging questions:
(i) is the testimony of nineteen centuries of Christian history and experience of no account in this question?;
(ii) does the new criticism readily agree with the historical position of the Jewish nation?;
(iii)  are the results of the modern view of the old testament really established?;
(iv) is the position of modern criticism really compatible with a belief in the old testament as a divine revelation?;
(v) is modern criticism based on a sound philosophy such as Christians can accept?;
(vi) can purely naturalistic premises be accepted without coming to purely naturalistic conclusions?;
(vii) can we overlook the evidence of archaeology?;
(viii) are the views of modern criticism consistent with the witness of our Lord to the old testament?

What grabbed me
I enjoyed the point about the testimony of Christendom for centuries against higher criticism: 'For nearly eighteen centuries these modern views of the Old Testament were not heard of. Yet this is not to be accounted for by the absence of intellectual power and scholarship in the Church. Men like Origen, Jerome, Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Erasmus, Calvin, Luther, Melancthon, to say nothing of the English Puritans and other divines of the seventeenth century, were not intellectually weak or inert, nor were they wholly void of critical acumen with reference to Holy Scripture. Yet they, and the whole Church with them, never hesitated to accept the view of the Old Testament which had come down to them, not only as a heritage from Judaism, but as endorsed by the apostles. Omitting all reference to our Lord, it is not open to question that the views of St. Paul and St. Peter and St. John about the Old Testament were the views of the whole Christian Church until the end of the eighteenth century. And, making every possible allowance for the lack of historical spirit and of modern critical methods, are we to suppose that the whole Church for centuries never exercised its mind on such subjects as the contents, history, and authority of the Old Testament? 

Besides, this is a matter which cannot be decided by intellectual criticism alone. Scripture appeals to conscience, heart and will, as well as to mind ; and the Christian consciousness, the accumulated spiritual experience of the body of Christ, is not to be lightly regarded, much less set aside, unless it is proved to be unwarranted by fact. While we do not say that "what is new is not true," the novelty of these modern critical views should give us pause before we virtually set aside the spiritual instinct of centuries of Christian experience.'

Higher criticism treads very much in a vein of chronological snobbery.

Next week's reading
Commence Chapter 8 (The tabernacle in the wilderness: did it exist?) by reading up to the paragraph beginning with the heading, 'VIII. Positive Biblical evidences'.

Now it's your turn
Please post your own notes and thoughts in the comments section below.