Dr. Farrar calls the Bible "the statesman's manual," but he judiciously7 refrains from showing that statesmen ever act upon its teaching; indeed, he spends a great deal of time in showing that they ought not to act upon its teaching, unless they carefully avoid the obvious "letter," and allow themselves to be influenced by the recondite8 "spirit." For instance, it is perfectly9 clear that the Bible does not contain a single word against slavery; it is also perfectly clear to all who possess a tincture of scholarship that many of its references to slavery are fraudulently translated. "Servants obey your masters" really means "Slaves obey your owners." Moreover, the Bible contains precise regulations of slavery. God did not tell the Jews that holding slaves was infamous10, that man could never have honest property in human flesh and blood. He allowed them to buy and sell Gentiles at their pleasure. He permitted them to enslave their own countrymen for a period of seven years, and in certain cases "for ever." Even in the New Testament we find St Paul sending back a runaway11 slave to his master. True, he sent with the slave a touching12 letter to the slave-owner, but sending him back at all was giving a sanction to the institution. Dr. Farrar admits that American pulpits "rang with incessant13 Scriptural defences of slavery." He quotes from a Southern bishop14, who described slavery as "a curse and a blight," yet declared it to be "recognised by the Bible," so that "every man has a right to his own slaves, provided they are not treated with unnecessary cruelty." Dr. Farrar asks whether there was ever "a stranger utterance15 on the lips of a Christian16 bishop." He calls this "distorting the Bible." But he does not prove the distortion. He calmly assumes it. He cannot deny the existence of all those slavery texts in the Bible. All he can do is to say that what was "relatively18 excusable" among the Jews is at present "execrable," and is now "absolutely and for ever wrong." Very good; but how was that discovered? Not by reading the Bible. The Jews read the Bible, the early Christians19 read the Bible, just as well as Dr. Farrar, but they did not find that it condemned20 slavery. Dr. Farrar lives in a later age, in the light of a higher civilisation21. He therefore reads into the Bible whatever it ought to contain as the word of God. He does not scruple22 to override23 explicit24 texts by more or less arbitrary deductions25 from vague maxims26 and ejaculations. He pretends that the "spirit" of the Bible in some way wrought27 the abolition28 of slavery. But every well-informed student is aware that the abolition of slavery depended upon economical conditions. We outgrow29 slavery by advancing beyond it in the process of industrial development, and when we have outgrown30 it we regard it with abhorrence31. When the institution is in the way of being supplanted32 by a higher form of productive labor33, the moral revolt against it begins, growing in strength and intensity34 as the economical change approaches its climax35. It was natural that the anti-slavery movement in America should take place in the Northern States, where the conditions favourable36 to slavery did not exist as they did in the Southern States. We may be pardoned for supposing that if Dr. Farrar's lot had been cast in a Southern State he would have defended slavery as a Bible institution. He is preaching now after its abolition, when denunciation of it is cheap and easy, and is no particular credit to the preacher's religion. While slavery existed in America, it was at first justified37 by the Bible in all parts of the union. Northern abolitionists at last found that the Bible did not teach slavery after all; but this did not alter the view of the Southern slaveholders and the Southern Churches. Here again we see the force of the Catholic taunt38 that Protestants can prove anything, and disprove anything, by appealing to texts in such a composite book as the Bible. Here again we also see that the Bible never instigates39 any step in the march of human improvement.
Dr. Farrar waxes eloquent40, after his special fashion, over the glories of England in the age of Elizabeth. He attributes them all to the "open Bible," which was then placed in the hands of the people. Of course they had nothing to do with the new astronomy, the discovery of America, and the invention of printing! Such paltry41 causes as these cannot enter into competition with the might and majesty42 of the Bible! Still, we may venture to remind Dr. Farrar that these Englishmen of the Elizabethan age, with the "open Bible" in their hands, went and started the African slave trade. Evidently they did not read in it then, as Dr. Farrar does now, any condemnation43 of that horrible business. They worked it for all it was worth. England, with the "open Bible" in its hand, continued to do so for another two hundred years. One of the chief centres of the slave trade was the pious44 city of Bristol. It grew rich on the abominable45 traffic. Slavery has been abolished, but the old odor of piety46 still clings to the city of Bristol. Its merchants fattened47 on the slave trade with the "open Bible" in their hands. They now subscribe48 to missionary49 societies to convert the blacks, and they still stick to the "open Bible." It was good for upholding black slavery, and it is still good for upholding white slavery.
All that we have said about slavery applies in its degree to polygamy. Both institutions are sanctioned by the Bible, and the pleas of the "Higher Criticism" in relation to the one are just as hollow as they are in relation to the other. We may go farther and say that the Bible is very far from being woman's best friend, as it is often represented. It starts by making her the Devil's first customer, and the introducer of sin and death; it continues to hold her as inferior and subject to man, lumping her in the tenth commandment with the house, the ox, and the ass17, as the man's property; and, finally, in the New Testament, it expressly tells her that her duty is to be silent and submissive, for the husband is the head of the wife as Christ is the head of the Church.
We need not follow Dr. Farrar in his rhapsodical references to the various achievements of the Bible. We may remark, however, that his reference to Japan is singularly unhappy. That country has accepted the leading ideas of Western civilisation, but it has not accepted Christianity. Nor is Dr. Farrar well advised in laying so much stress on the Pilgrim Fathers. He says that they had a preference for the "pure, unadulterated lessons of the Bible." Perhaps they had. But what were those lessons as illustrated50 by their actions? Certainly intolerance was one of them. They had no conception of religious liberty. "The Pilgrim Fathers," as Sir Walter Besant remarks in his little book on The Rise of the Empire, "believed that everybody should think as they themselves thought. Had they achieved their own way, they would have sent Laud51 himself, and all who thought like him, across the ocean with the greatest alacrity52." They also believed in witchcraft53, probably because Dr. Farrar was not at hand to explain that the Bible did not mean what it said; and they tortured and burnt witches with remarkable54 gusto.
It would also be a waste of time to correct all Dr. Farrar's statements about the influence of the Bible in other directions. We will take a single illustration of his fantastical method. He tells us that the Bible "inspired the pictures of Fra Angelico and Raphael, the music of Handel and Mendelssohn." Perhaps he will tell us whether it inspired Raphael's picture of the Fornarina, and why it did not inspire the music of Beethoven and Wagner. Both those great composers, as a matter of fact, were "infidels."
Nothing could be more absurd than orthodox talk about the Bible "inspiring" great poets, artists, and musicians. Men of genius are inspired by nature. Their inspiration is born with them. It cannot be made; it can only be utilised. All that religions have done is to employ the genius they could not create. Every religion has done this in turn. The genius was there always as a natural endowment. It existed before all the world's religions, and it will outlive them.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
mingled
|
|
| 混合，混入( mingle的过去式和过去分词 )； 混进，与…交往[联系] | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
specimen
|
|
| n.样本，标本 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
transparent
|
|
| adj.明显的，无疑的；透明的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
absurdity
|
|
| n.荒谬，愚蠢；谬论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
testament
|
|
| n.遗嘱；证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
judiciously
|
|
| adv.明断地，明智而审慎地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
recondite
|
|
| adj.深奥的，难解的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
infamous
|
|
| adj.声名狼藉的，臭名昭著的，邪恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
runaway
|
|
| n.逃走的人，逃亡，亡命者；adj.逃亡的，逃走的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
touching
|
|
| adj.动人的，使人感伤的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
incessant
|
|
| adj.不停的，连续的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
bishop
|
|
| n.主教，（国际象棋）象 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
utterance
|
|
| n.用言语表达，话语，言语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
ass
|
|
| n.驴；傻瓜，蠢笨的人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
relatively
|
|
| adv.比较...地，相对地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
condemned
|
|
| adj. 被责难的, 被宣告有罪的 动词condemn的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
civilisation
|
|
| n.文明，文化，开化，教化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
scruple
|
|
| n./v.顾忌，迟疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
override
|
|
| vt.不顾，不理睬，否决；压倒，优先于 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
explicit
|
|
| adj.详述的，明确的；坦率的；显然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
deductions
|
|
| 扣除( deduction的名词复数 )； 结论； 扣除的量； 推演 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
maxims
|
|
| n.格言，座右铭( maxim的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
wrought
|
|
| v.引起；以…原料制作；运转；adj.制造的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
abolition
|
|
| n.废除，取消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
outgrow
|
|
| vt.长大得使…不再适用；成长得不再要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
outgrown
|
|
| 长[发展] 得超过（某物）的范围( outgrow的过去分词 )； 长[发展]得不能再要（某物）； 长得比…快； 生长速度超过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
abhorrence
|
|
| n.憎恶；可憎恶的事 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
supplanted
|
|
| 把…排挤掉，取代( supplant的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
labor
|
|
| n.劳动，努力，工作，劳工；分娩；vi.劳动，努力，苦干；vt.详细分析；麻烦 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
intensity
|
|
| n.强烈，剧烈；强度；烈度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
climax
|
|
| n.顶点；高潮；v.(使)达到顶点 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
favourable
|
|
| adj.赞成的，称赞的，有利的，良好的，顺利的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
justified
|
|
| a.正当的，有理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
taunt
|
|
| n.辱骂，嘲弄；v.嘲弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
instigates
|
|
| n.使（某事物）开始或发生，鼓动( instigate的名词复数 )v.使（某事物）开始或发生，鼓动( instigate的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
eloquent
|
|
| adj.雄辩的，口才流利的；明白显示出的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
paltry
|
|
| adj.无价值的，微不足道的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
majesty
|
|
| n.雄伟，壮丽，庄严，威严；最高权威，王权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
condemnation
|
|
| n.谴责; 定罪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
pious
|
|
| adj.虔诚的；道貌岸然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
abominable
|
|
| adj.可厌的，令人憎恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
piety
|
|
| n.虔诚，虔敬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
fattened
|
|
| v.喂肥( fatten的过去式和过去分词 )；养肥（牲畜）；使（钱）增多；使（公司）升值 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
subscribe
|
|
| vi.(to)订阅，订购；同意；vt.捐助，赞助 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
missionary
|
|
| adj.教会的，传教(士)的；n.传教士 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
illustrated
|
|
| adj. 有插图的，列举的 动词illustrate的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
laud
|
|
| n.颂歌；v.赞美 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
alacrity
|
|
| n.敏捷，轻快，乐意 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
witchcraft
|
|
| n.魔法，巫术 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |