Page:American Journal of Sociology Volume 15.djvu/247

 BIBLICAL SOCIOLOGY 233

ency writing." It is arranged for a purpose that has no immedi- ate reference to history. Interpretation of the Bible from the scientific standpoint must, therefore, make due allowance for this edification tendency when estimating the literal value of biblical documents as testimony to objective historical facts.

It is also necessary to emphasize that the element of the miraculous, or supernatural (which bulks larger in the Hexa- teuch than elsewhere in the Bible) is precisely the element com- mon to the Bible and other ancient writings. It is not super- naturalism in the crude, popular sense that distinguishes the Bible. The element of miracle cannot, of itself, set the Bible up in contrast with other books. At this point the defender of the traditional view always insists upon the real nature of the biblical religion with its platform of ethical monotheism. It is here, indeed, that the contrast between the Bible and other ancient books emerges into high relief. It is a matter of pro- found significance that traditionalism is always compelled in self- defense to shift its emphasis and appeal to reason by comparing the biblical religion with other ancient systems. It is around this point of distinction that our present question turns. According to the old view of the Bible, the Hexateuch is to be uncritically accepted as a reliable source of information. According to the modern view, on the contrary, the Hexateuch is to be used only with caution. It is a report of history during the nomadic period, and contains only a kernel of literal truth.

A good example of the difficulty attending the use of the Hexateuch as a source for history before the settlement is to be found in the problem which engaged us in the preceding section of our inquiry. We saw that Yahweh was not only the god of Israel, but that he was a covenant-god. This made it necessary for us to investigate the objective, historical basis of the cove- nant tradition. We found that alike in the Judges-Samuel-King^ narrative, the books of the prophets, and the Hexateuch, the covenant was predicated upon a transaction which took place a short time before the Israelite invasion and settlement of Canaan. Yet, in going to the Hexateuch for light upon this matter we encountered great difficulty in envisaging history