Journal: Bibliotheca Sacra
Volume: BSAC 45:178 (Apr 1888)
Article: The Cosmogony Of Genesis
Author: Anonymous

BSac 45:178 (April 1888) p. 356

The Cosmogony Of Genesis

Professor Driver’s Critique Of Professor Dana

In the Bibliotheca Sacra for April, 1885, Professor Dana published an article, on the Cosmogony of Genesis, which has attracted wide attention. Twice, since, Mr. Gladstone has occupied the last page of The Nineteenth Century1 with special communications calling attention to the weighty truths set forth in this article. And now, after two years, the Regius Professor of Hebrew in the university of Oxford, England, feels called upon, in the Andover Review,2 to attempt a rebuttal of the numerous points in it which conflict with his own article in the Expositor, published about the same time.

We are glad to see that Dr. Driver is not inclined to take undue advantage of his own superior acquaintance with Hebrew, and so to shield himself behind a barricade of technical knowledge, but is ready to admit that the question at issue lies so near the surface that an ordinary British juryman can hope to decide intelligently between the opposing specialists. Without, therefore, presupposing any more knowledge in ourselves than in the average British juryman, we are permitted by Dr. Driver to come into the field and give our impressions of the weight of argument as presented by these two eminent authorities. We feel constrained, however, to make one further preliminary remark as to the spirit of the disputants.

We confess to no little surprise that Dr. Driver should accuse Professor Dana of misrepresenting facts for the sake of a theory, and of deflecting the sense which the text of Genesis legitimately expresses, in order to gain his point. But the exact language used by the Hebrew professor (italics, punctuation, and all) is as follows: “Thus the facts, though revealed, are misrepresented [by Professor Dana], for the sake of a theory!” (P. 647.) And again, “Professor Dana is too sound and genuine a scientist to deflect the facts of science, even by a hair’s-breadth, for the sake of harmonizing them with the book of Genesis; he does not hesitate, in order to gain the same object, to deflect the sense which the text of Genesis legitimately expresses” (p. 648). Far be it from us to retort with similar charges; but the way is certainly opened for us to speak with plainness.

Professor Driver is probably correct in his unwillingness to allow Professor

BSac 45:178 (April 1888) p. 357

Dana to take advantage, in his scheme for harmonizing Genesis and geology, of a difference among commentators as to the interpretation of Hebrew words and phr...