* Matthew xix. 7, 8; Mark x. 3, 4; xii. 26; Luke xvi. 29-31;
Luke xx. 37; John v. 45, 46; vii. 19, 22, 23.
"Do not think that I will accuse you to the Father. There is one that accuseth you, even Moses, in whom ye trust. For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?" (John v. 45-47).
The speaker in this instance is Christ himself. It is he, and not the evangelist, who speaks of the writings of Moses, and declares that Moses "wrote of me."
Now let us turn to the book of Psalms11, which has been well called the Hymn12 Book of the Second Temple. According to Dr. Farrar, they are "a collection of sacred poems in five separate books of very various antiquity13." Canon Driver points out that they are mostly posterior to the prophetical writings. "When the Psalms," he says, "are compared with the prophets, the latter seem to show, on the whole, the greater originality14; the psalmists, in other words, follow the prophets, appropriating and applying the truths which the prophets proclaimed." Very few of the Psalms are earlier than the seventh century before Christ. Dr. Driver affirms this with "tolerable confidence." Dr. Farrar says that "some may mount to an epoch15 earlier than David's," but this is mere16 conjecture17. The more cautious Dr. Driver will not commit himself further than "a verdict of non liquet"; that is to say, there is no proof that David did not write one or two of the Psalms, and no evidence that he did. His name was associated with the collection, in the same way as the name of Solomon was associated with the Proverbs. Nevertheless it is David who is referred to by Jesus as the author of the hundred-and-tenth Psalm10.* But this Psalm is one of those which are allowed to belong to a much later period. Jesus quoted it as David's, but Professor Sanday says "it seems difficult to believe it really came from him"**—which is as strong an expression as a Christian19 divine could be expected to permit himself in a case of such delicacy20.
* Matthew xxii. 43-45; Mark xii. 36, 37; Luke xx. 42-44.
** Professor W. Sanday, Bampton Lectures on Inspiration, p.
him, still more emphatically denies that this Psalm was, or
could have been, composed by David. See his Bampton Lectures
on The Incarnation of the Son of God, p. 197.
We have already seen that the book of Daniel was not written by the prophet Daniel, but by some unknown author hundreds of years later, probably in the second century before Christ. Upon this subject Professor Sanday takes precisely23 the same view as Canon Driver. He says that this is "the critical view" and has "won the day." All the facts support the "supposition that the book was written in the second century b.c.," and not "in the sixth." "The real author," he says, "is unknown," and "the name of Daniel is only assumed." He was writing, not a history, but a homily, to encourage his brethren at the time of the Maccabean struggle. "To this purpose of his," Professor Sanday says, "there were features in the traditional story of Daniel which appeared to lend themselves; and so he took that story and worked it up in the way which seemed to him most effective." Jesus Christ, however, held the orthodox view of his own time, and spoke8 of Daniel as the actual author of this book (Matthew xxiv. 15). "But this," Professor Sanday observes, "it is right to say, is only in one Gospel, where the mention of Daniel may be an insertion of the Evangelist's." Such conjectural24 shifts are Christian critics reduced to in their effort to minimise difficulties; as though reducing the mistakes of Jesus in any way saved his infallibility.
We will now turn to some portions of the Old Testament narrative25 which the Higher Criticism regards as legendary26, but which Jesus regarded as strictly27 historical. One of these is the story of the Flood. No one of any standing28 is now prepared to defend this story, at least as we find it in the book of Genesis. A few orthodox scientists, like Sir James W. Dawson, pour out copious29 talk about tremendous floods in former geological ages; but what has this to do with the Bible narrative of a universal deluge31 which occurred some four thousand five hundred years ago? The Higher Critics have the impatience32 of Freethinkers with such intellectual charlatanry33. They regard the story of the Flood as a Jewish legend, which was not even original, but borrowed from the superstitions34 of Babylon. Yet the opinion of Jesus Christ seems to have been very different. Here are his own words:—
"But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of Man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, and knew not until the flood came, and took them all away, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be" (Matthew xxiv. 37-39).
Jesus Christ appears to have believed, like the disciples36 he was addressing, like all the rest of his countrymen, and like nearly all Christians37 until very recently, that the Flood was an historical occurrence, that Noah and his family were saved in the ark, and that all the other inhabitants of the world were drowned.
Another story which the Higher Criticism dismisses as legendary is that of Jonah. The book in which it is related was, of course, not written by Jonah, the son of Amittai, of whom we read in 2 Kings xiv. 25, and who lived in the reign38 of Jeroboam II. "It cannot," as Dr. Driver says, "have been written until long after the lifetime of Jonah himself." Its probable date is the fifth century before Christ. Dr. Driver says it is "not strictly historical "—that is to say, the events recorded in it never happened. Jonah was not really entertained for three days in a whale's belly39, nor did his preaching convert the whole city of Nineveh. The writer's purpose was didactic; he wished to rebuke40 the exclusiveness of his own people, and to teach them that God's care extended, at least occasionally, to other nations as well as the Jews. Some critics, such as Cheyne and Wright, regard the story as allegorical; Jonah standing for Israel, the whale for Babylon, and the vomiting41 up of the prophet for the return of the Jews from exile. Dr. Farrar draws attention to the "remarkable42" fact that in the book of Kings "no allusion43 is made to any mission or adventure of the historic Jonah." He adds that there is not "the faintest trace of his mission or its results amid the masses of Assyrian inscriptions44." Even the writer of the book of Jonah, according to Dr. Farrar, attached "no importance" to its "supernatural incidents," which "only belong to the allegorical form of the story." So much for the Higher Critics; and now let us hear Jesus Christ:—
"An evil and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given to it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas: For as Jonas was three days and three nights in the whale's belly; so shall the Son of man be three days and three nights in the heart of the earth. The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment45 with this generation, and shall condemn46 it: because they repented47 at the preaching of Jonas; and behold48 a greater than Jonas is here" (Matthew xii. 39-41).
This utterance of Jesus is also reported in Luke (xi. 29-32), but with an important variation, the reference to Jonah in the whale's belly being entirely omitted. This variation is seized upon by Dr. Farrar. The fishy49 reference, he says, occurs in Matthew alone, and it may "represent a comment or marginal note by the Evangelist, or of some other Christian teacher." This, however, is an arbitrary supposition, which everyone is free to repudiate50; and Dr. Farrar feels obliged to add that "even if our Lord did allude51 to the whale" it does not follow that we should regard it as "literal history." But this is not the question at issue. The real question is, did Jesus Christ believe the story of Jonah and the whale? If he did not, it must be admitted that he had a most unfortunate way of expressing himself.
No educated Christian in the present age believes the story of Lot's wife being changed into a pillar of rock salt, although Josephus pretended that he had seen it, and many travellers and pilgrims have searched for it as a sacred relic52. Jesus Christ, however, gave great prominence53 to this salted lady. "Remember Lot's wife" is a verse by itself in the Protestant Bible (Luke xvii. 32). Jesus also refers to the rain of fire and brimstone by which Sodom was destroyed.
Here then, upon the face of it, we have Jesus Christ's testimony54 to three documents as having been written by men who did not write them, and to the historical character of three incidents which are purely55 fabulous56. Now the Higher Criticism must be wrong, or else Jesus Christ was mistaken; in other words, he was not infallible, and therefore not God. But the Higher Critics declare that they are not wrong; they also declare that Jesus Christ was not mistaken. Let us see how they try to save their own accuracy and his infallibility.
We must remark, in passing, that some of these critics hint, without exactly asserting, that Jesus may have been mistaken. Dr. Farrar bids us remember that "by the very fact of taking our nature upon him Christ voluntarily submitted himself to human limitations." There were some things which, as a man, he did not know. Yes, but he was also God; and the conjunction of "knowledge" and "ignorance" in one person, and with respect to a single subject, would dissolve the unity57 of the God-man, which is a dogma of Christian theology. Moreover, as Canon Liddon argued, it is not so much a question of Christ's omniscience58 as a question of his infallibility. Supposing there were some matters, such as the date of the day of judgment, of which he was ignorant; he might confess his ignorance or remain silent, and no harm would accrue59 to anyone; but if he spoke upon any matter, and was mistaken through want of knowledge, he would become a propagator of error; and this would not only destroy the doctrine60 of his deity61, but very seriously impair62 his authority as a teacher, and cause everything he said to be open to the gravest suspicion. No less dangerous is it to fall back upon the explanation that "the discourses of Christ are not reproduced by the Evangelists with verbal identity"—to use Dr. Farrar's own language. Dr. Sanday seems a little attracted by this explanation. He reminds us that, whatever views Jesus himself entertained as to the Scriptures63 of the Old Testament, his views have come down to us through the medium of persons who shared the erroneous ideas that were then current on the subject. We must be prepared, he says, for the possibility that Christ's sayings in regard to it "have not been reported with absolute accuracy." But after all "not much allowance" should be made for this; which means, we suspect, that the worthy64 Professor saw the dreadful peril65 of pursuing this vein66 of observation, and desisted from it before he had said enough to cause serious mischief67.
The more astute68 Higher Critics avoid such dangers. They resort to a theory that combines mystery and plausibility69, by which they hope to satisfy believers on both sides of their natures. Dr. Farrar tells us that Christ, to become a man, emptied himself of his glory; and that this "examination" involved the necessity of speaking as a man to men. This position is perhaps best expressed by Canon Gore:—
"It is contrary to his whole method to reveal his Godhead by any anticipations71 of natural knowledge. The Incarnation was a self-emptying of God to reveal himself under conditions of human nature, and from the human point of view. We are able to draw a distinction between what he revealed and what he used......Now when he speaks of the 'sun rising' he is using ordinary human knowledge. Thus he does not reveal his eternity72 by statements as to what had happened in the past, or was to happen in the future, outside the ken9 of existing history. He made his Godhead gradually manifest by his attitude towards men and things about him, by his moral and spiritual claims, by his expressed relation to his father, not by any miraculous73 exemptions74 of himself from the conditions of natural knowledge in its own proper province. Thus the utterances75 of Christ about the Old Testament do not seem to be nearly definite or clear enough to allow of our supposing that in this case he is departing from the general method of the Incarnation, by bringing to bear the unveiled omniscience of the Godhead, to anticipate or foreclose a development of natural knowledge."*
This would perhaps be sublime76 if it were only intelligible77. We are not surprised at Dr. Driver's turning away from the metaphysics of this theory. His mind is cast in a more sober and practical mould. It is enough for him that the aim of Christ's teaching was a religious one; that he naturally accepted, as the basis of his teaching, the opinions respecting the Old Testament that were current around him; that he did not raise "issues for which the time was not yet ripe, and which, had they been raised, would have interfered78 seriously with the paramount79 purpose of his life."**
361.
** Introduction, Preface, xix.
This is excellently said. It is just what Paley might have written in present-day circumstances. But it contains no note of the supernatural. It deals with Jesus as a mere man, who did not disclose all the information he possessed80, but sometimes veiled his knowledge for temporary reasons. It leaves his Godhead in the background. It does not recognise how easy it was for Omnipotence81 to act differently. And when the Higher Criticism points out that the human mind could, in the course of time, free itself from errors as to the authorship and credibility of the Old Testament, it forgets that Jesus Christ, by accommodating himself to those errors, perpetuated82 them. His authority was appealed to for centuries—it is appealed to now—in favor of falsehood. Nor is this falsehood trivial and innocuous. It has been extremely harmful. It has fostered a wrong view of the Bible, it has prolonged the reign of superstition35, and thus hindered the growth of true civilisation83. This is an impeachment84 of the moral character of Jesus. It is a confession85 that he served a temporary object at the expense of the permanent interests of humanity. We feel constrained86, therefore, to admit the force of the words of Canon Liddon:—
"We have lived to hear men proclaim the legendary and immoral87 character of considerable portions of those Old Testament scriptures, upon which our Lord has set the seal of his infallible authority. And yet, side by side with this rejection88 of Scriptures so deliberately89 sanctioned by Christ, there is an unwillingness90 which, illogical as it is, we must sincerely welcome, to profess18 any explicit91 rejection of the Church's belief in Christ's divinity. Hence arises the endeavour to intercept92 a conclusion, which might otherwise have seemed so plain as to make arguments in its favor an intellectual impertinence. Hence a series of singular refinements93, by which Christ is presented to the modern world as really Divine, yet as subject to fatal error; as Founder94 of the true religion, yet as the credulous95 patron of a volume replete96 with worthless legends; as the highest Teacher and Leader of humanity, yet withal as the ignorant victim of the prejudices and follies97 of an unenlightened age."*
* Canon H. P. Liddon, The Divinity of Christ (fourteenth
edition), p. 462.
Canon Gore devotes several pages of his Bampton Lectures to this subject, but he does not fairly answer the straightforward98 objections raised by Canon Liddon. Dealing99 with the references of Jesus to the Mosaic authorship of the Pentateuch, and to Jonah's three days' entombment in the whale's belly, and with the argument that this endorsement100 by Jesus "binds101 us to receive these narratives102 as simple history," he blandly103 declares, "To this argument I do not think that we need yield." Of course not. There is no need to yield to anything you do not like; for this is a free country, at least to Christians. But what is the logical conclusion? That is the point to be decided104. Canon Gore does not face it; he merely expresses a personal disinclination. Subsequently he pleads that "a heavy burden" should not be laid on "sensitive consciences," and that men should not be asked "to accept as matter of revelation what seems to them an improbable literary theory." But this again is a personal appeal. These men must be left to attend to their own consciences. They have no right to demand a suppression of truth, or a perversion105 of logic30, for their particular advantage.
When a candid106 reader has finished all that the Higher Criticism has to say on this matter, we believe he will be filled with a sense of its insincerity. It never strikes a note of triumph, or even a note of conviction. It is timid, furtive107, and apologetic; and shelters itself against reason by plunging108 into mystery. In place of all the difficulties it removes it sets up a colossal109 one of its own manufacture; the difficulty, to wit, of conceiving that God himself lent a sanction to grave and far-reaching error as to his own Word; or what would inevitably110 be regarded as a sanction, and would necessarily delay for many hundreds of years the discovery and reception of the truth. The Higher Criticism, in short, has supplied a new argument against the deity of Jesus Christ.
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
testament
|
|
| n.遗嘱；证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
discourses
|
|
| 论文( discourse的名词复数 )； 演说； 讲道； 话语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
mosaic
|
|
| n./adj.镶嵌细工的，镶嵌工艺品的，嵌花式的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
emphatic
|
|
| adj.强调的，着重的；无可置疑的，明显的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
scruple
|
|
| n./v.顾忌，迟疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
strata
|
|
| n.地层（复数）；社会阶层 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
spoke
|
|
| n.（车轮的）辐条；轮辐；破坏某人的计划；阻挠某人的行动 v.讲，谈（speak的过去式）；说；演说；从某种观点来说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
ken
|
|
| n.视野，知识领域 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
10
psalm
|
|
| n.赞美诗，圣诗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
psalms
|
|
| n.赞美诗( psalm的名词复数 )；圣诗；圣歌；(中的) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
hymn
|
|
| n.赞美诗，圣歌，颂歌 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
antiquity
|
|
| n.古老；高龄；古物，古迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
originality
|
|
| n.创造力，独创性；新颖 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
epoch
|
|
| n.(新)时代；历元 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
mere
|
|
| adj.纯粹的；仅仅，只不过 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
conjecture
|
|
| n./v.推测，猜测 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
profess
|
|
| v.声称，冒称，以...为业，正式接受入教，表明信仰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
delicacy
|
|
| n.精致，细微，微妙，精良；美味，佳肴 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
gore
|
|
| n.凝血，血污；v.（动物）用角撞伤，用牙刺破；缝以补裆；顶 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
utterance
|
|
| n.用言语表达，话语，言语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
precisely
|
|
| adv.恰好，正好，精确地，细致地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
conjectural
|
|
| adj.推测的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
narrative
|
|
| n.叙述，故事；adj.叙事的，故事体的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
legendary
|
|
| adj.传奇（中）的，闻名遐迩的；n.传奇（文学） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
strictly
|
|
| adv.严厉地，严格地；严密地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
standing
|
|
| n.持续，地位；adj.永久的，不动的，直立的，不流动的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
copious
|
|
| adj.丰富的，大量的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
logic
|
|
| n.逻辑(学)；逻辑性 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
deluge
|
|
| n./vt.洪水，暴雨，使泛滥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
impatience
|
|
| n.不耐烦，急躁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
charlatanry
|
|
| n.吹牛，骗子行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
34
superstitions
|
|
| 迷信，迷信行为( superstition的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
superstition
|
|
| n.迷信，迷信行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
disciples
|
|
| n.信徒( disciple的名词复数 )；门徒；耶稣的信徒；（尤指）耶稣十二门徒之一 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
reign
|
|
| n.统治时期，统治，支配，盛行；v.占优势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
belly
|
|
| n.肚子，腹部；(像肚子一样)鼓起的部分，膛 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
rebuke
|
|
| v.指责，非难，斥责 [反]praise | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
vomiting
|
|
| 吐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
allusion
|
|
| n.暗示，间接提示 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
inscriptions
|
|
| （作者）题词( inscription的名词复数 )； 献词； 碑文； 证劵持有人的登记 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
judgment
|
|
| n.审判；判断力，识别力，看法，意见 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
condemn
|
|
| vt.谴责，指责；宣判(罪犯)，判刑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
repented
|
|
| 对（自己的所为）感到懊悔或忏悔( repent的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
behold
|
|
| v.看，注视，看到 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
fishy
|
|
| adj. 值得怀疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
repudiate
|
|
| v.拒绝，拒付，拒绝履行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
allude
|
|
| v.提及，暗指 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
relic
|
|
| n.神圣的遗物，遗迹，纪念物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
prominence
|
|
| n.突出；显著；杰出；重要 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
purely
|
|
| adv.纯粹地，完全地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
fabulous
|
|
| adj.极好的；极为巨大的；寓言中的，传说中的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
unity
|
|
| n.团结，联合，统一；和睦，协调 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
omniscience
|
|
| n.全知，全知者，上帝 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
accrue
|
|
| v.(利息等)增大，增多 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
doctrine
|
|
| n.教义；主义；学说 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
deity
|
|
| n.神，神性；被奉若神明的人(或物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
impair
|
|
| v.损害，损伤；削弱，减少 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
scriptures
|
|
| 经文，圣典( scripture的名词复数 )； 经典 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
worthy
|
|
| adj.(of)值得的，配得上的；有价值的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
peril
|
|
| n.(严重的)危险；危险的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
vein
|
|
| n.血管，静脉；叶脉，纹理；情绪；vt.使成脉络 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
mischief
|
|
| n.损害，伤害，危害；恶作剧，捣蛋，胡闹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
astute
|
|
| adj.机敏的，精明的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
plausibility
|
|
| n. 似有道理, 能言善辩 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
rev
|
|
| v.发动机旋转，加快速度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
anticipations
|
|
| 预期( anticipation的名词复数 )； 预测； （信托财产收益的）预支； 预期的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
eternity
|
|
| n.不朽，来世；永恒，无穷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
miraculous
|
|
| adj.像奇迹一样的，不可思议的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
exemptions
|
|
| n.（义务等的）免除( exemption的名词复数 )；免（税）；（收入中的）免税额 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
utterances
|
|
| n.发声( utterance的名词复数 )；说话方式；语调；言论 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
sublime
|
|
| adj.崇高的，伟大的；极度的，不顾后果的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
intelligible
|
|
| adj.可理解的，明白易懂的，清楚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
interfered
|
|
| v.干预( interfere的过去式和过去分词 )；调停；妨碍；干涉 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
paramount
|
|
| a.最重要的，最高权力的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
possessed
|
|
| adj.疯狂的；拥有的，占有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
omnipotence
|
|
| n.全能，万能，无限威力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
perpetuated
|
|
| vt.使永存（perpetuate的过去式与过去分词形式） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
civilisation
|
|
| n.文明，文化，开化，教化 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
impeachment
|
|
| n.弹劾；控告；怀疑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
confession
|
|
| n.自白，供认，承认 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
constrained
|
|
| adj.束缚的,节制的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
immoral
|
|
| adj.不道德的，淫荡的，荒淫的，有伤风化的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
rejection
|
|
| n.拒绝，被拒，抛弃，被弃 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
deliberately
|
|
| adv.审慎地；蓄意地；故意地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
unwillingness
|
|
| n. 不愿意，不情愿 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
explicit
|
|
| adj.详述的，明确的；坦率的；显然的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
intercept
|
|
| vt.拦截，截住，截击 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
refinements
|
|
| n.（生活）风雅；精炼( refinement的名词复数 )；改良品；细微的改良；优雅或高贵的动作 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
Founder
|
|
| n.创始者，缔造者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
credulous
|
|
| adj.轻信的，易信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
replete
|
|
| adj.饱满的，塞满的；n.贮蜜蚁 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
follies
|
|
| 罪恶，时事讽刺剧； 愚蠢，蠢笨，愚蠢的行为、思想或做法( folly的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
straightforward
|
|
| adj.正直的，坦率的；易懂的，简单的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
dealing
|
|
| n.经商方法，待人态度 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
endorsement
|
|
| n.背书；赞成，认可，担保；签(注)，批注 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
binds
|
|
| v.约束( bind的第三人称单数 )；装订；捆绑；（用长布条）缠绕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
narratives
|
|
| 记叙文( narrative的名词复数 )； 故事； 叙述； 叙述部分 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
blandly
|
|
| adv.温和地，殷勤地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
decided
|
|
| adj.决定了的，坚决的；明显的，明确的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
perversion
|
|
| n.曲解；堕落；反常 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
candid
|
|
| adj.公正的，正直的；坦率的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
furtive
|
|
| adj.鬼鬼崇崇的，偷偷摸摸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
plunging
|
|
| adj.跳进的，突进的v.颠簸( plunge的现在分词 )；暴跌；骤降；突降 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
colossal
|
|
| adj.异常的，庞大的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
inevitably
|
|
| adv.不可避免地；必然发生地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |