We are told by this wordy defender18 of the faith that the Christian2 Scriptures20 are "the Supreme21 Bible of Humanity"—as though, if it be the Word of God, it could be anything less. Our attention is called to its "unique transcendence"—which is a penny-a-lining pleonasm. We are informed that it has "triumphed with ease over the assaults of its enemies"—which is a remarkably22 modest assertion, especially in view of the fact that the "enemies" of the Bible were, for fifteen hundred years, generally subdued24 by persecution25, imprisonment26, torture, assassination27, and the burning of their writings. We are further informed that the Bible commands the reverence28, guides the thoughts, educates the souls, and kindles29 the moral aspirations30 of men "through all the world"—which is an extremely sober statement in view of the fact that all the nominal31 Christians32, not to be too precise about the real ones, do not amount to more than a fourth of the world's inhabitants. So wonderful a book is the Bible that "the Lord Jesus Christ himself did not disdain33 to quote from the Old Testament34"—which was his own word, in the sense that it was (professedly) written under divine inspiration. This is absurd enough, but it is nothing to the rapturous eulogy35 of the Bible which follows it. "All the best and brightest English verse [not some, mark, but all!], from the poems of Chaucer to the plays of Shakespeare in their noblest parts, are echoes of its lessons; and from Cowper to Wordsworth," Dr. Farrar says, "from Coleridge to Tennyson, the greatest of our poets have drawn36 from its pages their loftiest wisdom." Really, one is tempted37 to ask whether such stuff as this is possible in any other country than England, or perhaps America; and whether, even in England or America, it is possible outside churches, chapels38, and Sunday-schools. Sixty pages later—Dr. Farrar could not sober down in that long interval—he declares that "It was the Bible which created the prose literature of England." Now if this were true it would not serve Dr. Farrar's ostensible39 purpose. It would not prove that the Bible is a divine revelation. It would only prove the historical—that is to say, the largely accidental—importance of the Authorised Version of the Bible in the development of English literature. But this declaration of Dr. Farrar's is not true. The Authorised Version did not initiate40, it rather closed, a period of our literary history. The English of the translators in their Preface is vastly different from the English of their translation. Indeed, they were rather collators than translators. They took the older versions as the basis of their work, they altered as little as possible, and the alterations41 they did make were strictly42 in harmony with the time-honored style of those older versions, a style which was even then very archaic43. Dr. Marsh44, himself a devout45 Christian, contends that "the dialect of this translation was not, at the time of the revision, or, indeed, at any other period, the actual current book-language nor the colloquial46 speech of the English people." He maintains that it was "a consecrated47 diction" which had been "gradually built up" from the time of Wycliffe.* Its language was not the language of Chaucer's prose, nor even of Wycliffe's own prose, any more than it was the language of Bacon's or Shakespeare's, or even that of divines like Hooker. The Authorised Version is indeed a monument of English, but of special English. It has always stood aside from the main development of English prose. Of course it has exercised a considerable influence, but that influence has been chiefly indirect. From the young naive48 prose of Malory to the mature and calculated prose of Swift—not to come farther—there is a clear stream of development, to which the language and style of the English Bible have contributed infinitely49 less than is generally assumed. With the single exception of Bunyan's masterpiece, which stands apart and alone, it is difficult to name a first-class prose competition that was greatly indebted to our Authorised Version. Even the divines disregarded it as a literary model, and perhaps most conspicuously50 so in the seventeenth century, immediately after its publication.
* George P. Marsh, Lectures on the English Language
(Murray), pp. 441, 445.
Dr. Farrar is entirely51 wrong in declaring that the Bible created the prose literature of England. Even if he only means that English prose was vastly profited by the religious literature which followed upon the heels of the Reformation, it is easy to reply that this literature was mainly controversial and never remarkable for the higher graces and dexterities. For those virtues, prior to the time of Taylor and South, we must turn to secular52 and even to "profane53" compositions; a fact which is well known to every real student of English literature.
The next device of Dr. Farrar's advocacy would be astounding54 if one did not know the muddle-headed public for whom he writes. He devotes a monstrous55 number of pages to the citing of a "cloud of witnesses to the glory and supremacy56 of the Holy Scriptures," beginning with the great John Henry Newman and winding57 up with the notorious Hall Caine. Sandwiched between these dissimilar "witnesses" are Heine, Goethe, Rousseau, Wesley, Emerson, Carlyle, Huxley, Arnold, Ruskin, and a host of others. Most of them were Christians, and afford a partisan58 testimony59 which is not very valuable. In any case, there is no real argument in a list of names. When a man is being tried on a definite charge, it is idle to recite a catalogue of his distinguished friends. Witnesses to character are only heard in mitigation of sentence after the jury has returned a verdict of Guilty. Perhaps this fact had its influence on Dr. Farrar's mind; at any rate, he calls his "cloud of witnesses" when he has ended all he had to say in the form of argument.
These witnesses, moreover, are jumbled60 together without the slightest discrimination. Let us take a few illustrations to show the futility61 of Dr. Farrar's method.
John Wesley cried "Give me the book of God! Here is knowledge enough for me. Let me be a man of one book." Yes, and John Wesley believed in witchcraft62, and honestly declared that to throw over witchcraft was to throw over the Bible. He had, also, his own way of proving "the divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures." He wrote a "Clear and Concise63 Demonstration64," from which we take the following extract:—
"I beg leave to propose a short, clear, and strong argument to prove the divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures.
"The Bible must be the invention either of good men or angels, bad men or devils, or of God.
"(1) It could not be the invention of good men or angels; for they neither would nor could make a book, and tell lies all the time they were writing it, saying, 'Thus saith the Lord,' when it was their own invention.
"(2) It could not be the invention of bad men or devils; for they would not make a book which commands all duty, forbids all sin, and condemns65 their souls to hell to all eternity66.
"(3) Therefore, I draw this conclusion, that the Bible must be given by divine inspiration."*
* John Wesley's Works (1865), vol. xi., pp. 464-465.
Could anything be more childish than this ridiculous play upon the word "invention," and this absurd supposition that "good men" and "bad men" are two sharp divisions of the human species? We know that all men are mixtures, and that honest men may be mistaken, and tell falsehoods without lying. We are therefore able to measure the value of John Wesley's "demonstration" that the Bible is inspired.
John Ruskin thanks his mother for daily reading the Bible with him in his childhood, and daily making him learn a part of it by heart. This is seized upon by Dr. Farrar, who places it in his list of testimonies67. But it might have been wise—it would certainly have been honest—to tell the reader how Ruskin views the Bible. This great writer has formulated68 four theories of the Bible, the third of which he has declared to be "for the last half-century the theory of the soundest scholars and thinkers in Europe." And what is this theory? Here it is in Ruskin's own words:—
"That the mass of religious Scripture19 contains merely the best efforts which we hitherto know to have been made by any of the races of men towards the discovery of some relations with the spiritual world; that they are only trustworthy as expressions of the enthusiastic visions or beliefs of earnest men oppressed by the world's darkness, and have no more authoritative69 claim on our faith than the religious speculations70 and histories of the Egyptians, Greeks, Persians, and Indians; but are, in common with all these, to be reverently71 studied, as containing a portion, divinely appointed, of the best wisdom which the human intellect, earnestly seeking for help from God, has hitherto been able to gather between birth and death."*
Letters in this pregnant little volume were written by
Ruskin as far back as 1867.
Surely this is a very different view of the Bible from the one which is presented by Dr. Farrar. Setting aside a little religious phraseology, a Freethinker might endorse73 Ruskin's theory of the Bible. Everything is substantially granted to the Freethinker when it is admitted that the Bible has "no authoritative claim on our faith." Whatever truth and beauty it contains may then be thankfully accepted.
Professor Huxley's famous eulogy of the Bible, as a book to be read in Board Schools, is made the most of by Dr. Farrar. He must have winced75, however, at Huxley's reference to what a sensible teacher would "eliminate" as "not desirable for children to occupy themselves with." He was not sensitive enough to wince74 at the statement that "even the noble Stoic76, Marcus Antoninus, is too high and refined for an ordinary child"—which is virtually a testimonial in his favor for grown-up men and women. Dr. Farrar crows lustily over what he calls "Professor Huxley's testimony to the unique glory of the Scriptures." It is perhaps well for him that Huxley is incapable77 of resenting this misrepresentation. Still, it must be admitted that on this occasion, as on one or two others, Huxley did gratuitously78 play into the hands of the enemy. He might have known the kind of use they would make of his "graceful79 concessions80."
Dr. Farrar had not the honesty to tell his readers that Huxley had the most sovereign contempt for his theory of the Bible. The great Agnostic held, for instance, that "belief in a demonic world" is inculcated throughout the New Testament, and that this belief is "totally devoid82 of foundation." He declared that Inspiration, in the school of the Higher Criticism, is "deprived of its old intelligible83 sense," and is "watered down into a mystification." He laughed at the miracles of the Gospels, and made great fun of the story of the bedevilled Gadarean swine. He held that religion and morality have really no necessary connection, and sneered84 at the "supernaturalists"—gentlemen like Dr. Farrar—who took to patronising morality when they saw its importance, and "have ever since tried to persuade mankind that the existence of ethics is bound up with that of supernaturalism."*
To accept a testimonial from such a writer is abject85 on the part of a clergyman defending the inspiration of the Bible; and to parade it is simply contemptible87. More than fifty years ago, when this petty trick of Christian apologetics was coming into vogue88, it was rebuked89 by Newman, who disdained90 as "unworthy" the practice of "boasting of the admissions of infidels concerning the beauty or utility of the Christian system, as though," he added with fine sarcasm91, "it were a great thing for a divine gift to obtain praise for human excellence92."**
* Huxley, Science and Christian Tradition, pp. xv., 25, 54,
etc.
** John Henry Newman, University Sermons, p. 71.
Dr. Farrar's citation93 of Matthew Arnold is open to the same kind of criticism. "He retained but little faith in the miraculous94," we are told, and "his creed95 was anything but orthodox." But is it fair to suggest that Arnold had any creed at all? He rejected the idea of a personal God, he regarded Jesus as a merely human teacher, and it is evident from his books and his published correspondence that he had no belief in personal immortality96. As for his "faith in the miraculous," it was not "little," with or without the "but"; it was a minus quantity. He positively97 disbelieved in the miraculous. It was a part of his plain message to the Churches that the reign81 of the Bible miracles was doomed98, that they were all fairy tales, and that, if the fate of the Bible was bound up with theirs, the Bible was doomed too. Arnold said all this when he was living, and it is useless for Dr. Farrar to disguise the fact, or to minimise it by artful phrases. We commend to his attention—would that we could commend it to the attention of his readers!—the following passage from a letter of Arnold's to Sir Mountstuart Grant Duff, dated July 22, 1882:—
"The central fact of the situation always remains99 to me this: that whereas the basis of things amidst all chance and change has even in Europe generally been for ever so long supernatural Christianity, and far more so in England than in Europe generally, this basis is certainly going—going amidst the full consciousness of the continentals100 that it is going, and amidst the provincial101 unconsciousness of the English that it is going."*
* Matthew Arnold, Letters, vol. ii., p. 201.
Considering what Arnold's views really were, is it of any use to make the statement of rather doubtful accuracy that the Bible was his "chief and constant study"? Is it not misleading to talk of his "intense reverence and admiration102 for the Sacred Books"? He did not regard them as sacred. He studied and valued the Bible as literature, not as revelation; and it is monstrous to cite him as a witness in favor of the Bible as it is represented in the school of Dr. Farrar.
We need not waste time over Dr. Farrar's banal103 remark that Livingstone, Stanley, and the Bible together have caused "the extension of the British protectorate over 170,000 square miles" in a certain part of Africa. We may treat with the same indifference104 his boast of the millions of copies of the "Sacred Books" distributed by the British and American Bible Societies. Such "evidences" are only fit for the street-corner. Only a low-minded, commercial-sodden Christian could imagine that the multiplication105 of copies of a book is any sort of testimony to its intrinsic truth and value; and in this particular case the demand is a forced one, depending on the incessant106 stimulus107 of the supply.
Another argument of Dr. Farrar's for the "supremacy" of the Bible is based upon the history of Christian martyrdoms. He gives several instances of Christians, old and young, rich and poor, high-placed and humble108, who have died for their faith, and entered "the dark river and its still waters with a smile upon their faces." He attributes their fortitude109 to trust in the promises of the Bible. But he does not tell us how it proves the truth of the Bible either as history or as revelation. Millions of Jews have died at the hands of Christian bigots, and their heroism110 amidst torture and massacre111 has never been exceeded in human annals. Does this prove that the New Testament is not a revelation, and that Jesus Christ was not God? Men of other faiths have faced death with sublime112 courage. Does this prove that their beliefs were accurate? Mohammedans are notoriously ready to die for their religion; the Mohammedan dervishes in the Soudan never quailed113 before the most murderous storm of shell and bullets; they fell in thousands at Omdurman, and the Khalifa's standard-bearer, when all around him were slain114, stood upright under the holy flag, with a smile of defiance115 on his face, which never left it until he sank shot-riddled upon the heap of his dead comrades. Does this prove that the Koran is the Word of God?
The orthodox argument seems to be this: if a Christian dies for the Bible, that proves it to be a divine book; if a devotee of any other faith dies for his Sacred Scripture. That proves nothing—unless it be the obstinacy116 of wrong opinions.
There is something intensely comical in the seriousness with which Dr. Farrar relates the martyrdom of Christians who were put to death by other Christians. He does not see that all he gains on one side is lost on the other, that Christian persecution balances Christian fortitude, and that nothing is left to the credit of his account. He devotes a whole page to the murder of Margaret Lachlan and Margaret Wilson by "brutal117 and tyrannous bigots" at Wigton in 1677. These two women were Covenanting118 Christians, and their murderers were Episcopalian Christians. They died singing psalms120 which their murderers believed to be the word of God. It is difficult to see what advantage the Bible derives121 from this incident.
One may be interested by the reminder122 that Oliver Cromwell quoted two verses from the hundred and seventeenth Psalm119 after his victory at Dunbar; but one may remember on one's own account that David Leslie, the defeated Scots general, was as devout a Christian and Bible-reader as Oliver Cromwell, and that his piety123 was stimulated124 by the presence in his camp of a whole congregation of Presbyterian ministers. Altogether it is a pity that Dr. Farrar picks his illustrations in this one-eyed fashion. He forgets that other people may have two eyes, and see on both sides of them. He almost invites the sarcasm that the one-eyed man is only a leader amongst the blind.
The real secret of whatever supremacy belongs to the Bible is to be sought in a different direction. It was long ago remarked by a French Freethinker, in a work attributed to Boulanger, but really written by D'Holbach, that education and authority were the two great pillars of the Christian revelation.
"If a body of men in possession of power, and able to like advantage of the credulity of mankind, were to find their interest concerned in doing so, they would make men believe at the end of a few centuries that the adventures of Don Quixote are perfectly125 true, and that the prophecies of Nostrodamus have been inspired by God himself. By dint126 of glosses127, of commentaries, and of allegories, it is easy to discover and to prove what one pleases; however glaring an imposture128 may be, it can be made at last, by the aid of time, cunning, and power, to pass for truth which no one must doubt. Deceivers who are obstinate129, and who are supported by public authority, can make ignorant people, who are always credulous130, believe anything, especially if they can persuade them that there is merit in not noticing inconsistencies, contradictions, and palpable absurdities131, and that there is danger in making use of their reason."*
* Examen Critique de St. Paul, c. 3.
Abolish all the Churches that exist for the purpose of preaching up the Bible as a divine revelation; destroy all the clerical corporations that live and operate upon this basis; take away, at least, the public revenues and special privileges they enjoy; deprive them of the patronage132 of the legislature and the government; remove their Holy Scriptures from the public schools, where they are retained in defiance of the principles of civil and religious liberty; let little children no longer be suborned in favor of the supernatural claims of this book before they are able to judge for themselves; let the Bible take its own chance with the rest of the world's literature; and then, and not till then, can its natural supremacy be established. But the clergy86 know that such an experiment would be absolutely fatal to their pretensions133. They dare not accept a fair field and no favor. They know in their heart of hearts that they are serving a lie. Their dishonesty is apparent at every turn. Dr. Farrar calls upon England to "cling to her open Bible." Well, the Peculiar134 People do so. They read the open Bible, they follow its teaching as closely as possible, they obey the commandments of Jesus Christ. And what is the result? They are cast into prison like felons135. One of them is suffering that pain and indignity136 at the present moment.
A good husband, a good father, a good neighbor, a good citizen, he has committed the crime of practically believing what Dr. Farrar and the rest of the clergy facetiously137 preach—namely, that the Bible is the Book of God, and the divine rule of faith and conduct. For this crime he is imprisoned138 under the verdict of a Christian jury and the sentence of a Christian judge; and not a single Christian minister raises his voice against this infamous139 spectacle. Christianity is now only an organised hypocrisy140. It subsists141 upon an inherited fund of power, wealth, and reputation. Even the clergy have no vital belief in the inspiration of the Bible. It is merely the charter under which they trade. It is a source of oracular texts for their ambiguous sermons. It is lauded142 and adored, and neglected and defied. To bring it into disbelief and contempt by argument and ridicule143 is a misdemeanor; to bring it into disbelief and contempt by acting144 upon it is a felony. The only safe course is that adopted by the clergy, who neither believe it nor disbelieve it, but use it as it serves their occasions; and as long as it answers their ends it will remain the Book of God.
Let us not be misunderstood. We are far from desiring to engage in a crusade against the Bible as a collection of ancient literature. We are neither called upon nor disposed to deny its real merits, however they are exaggerated in religious circles. It undoubtedly145 contains some fine poetry, occasional pathos146, and more frequent sublimity. Its style has nearly always the charm of simplicity. All this may be allowed without playing into the hands of the super-naturalists. Further than this we need not go. In our opinion, it is absurd to place the Bible at the top of human compositions. More than sixty writers are alleged147 to have contributed to its production, but the whole mass of them do not rival the magnificent and fecund148 genius of Shakespeare. Above all, they have no wit or humour, in which Shakespeare abounds149; and wit and humor belong to the higher development of intellect and emotion. No, the Bible is not the unapproachable masterpiece which it is declared to be by its fanatical devotees. But whatever its intrinsic merits may prove to be, in the light of long and free appreciation150, the Bible cannot be accepted as a revelation from God without wilful151 self-delusion on the part of educated men and women. If God had a message for his children, he would at least make it clear; but this revelation needs another revelation to explain it, and creeds152 and commentaries are the symbols of its obscurity. God's message would tell us what we could not otherwise learn, but there is no such information in the Bible. God would apprise153 us of what he specially23 desired us to remember, and would not mix it confusedly with a tremendous mass of alien matter. God would not puzzle us; he would enlighten us. He would make his communication so clear that a wayfaring154 man, though a fool, could understand it; whereas, if the Bible be his communication, no wayfaring man, unless he is a fool, pretends to understand it. God would not clog155 his message with myths, legends, mysteries, absurdities, falsehoods, and filth156; and leave us to extricate157 it with endless labor158 and perpetual uncertainty159. The so-called Higher Criticism is therefore as absurd as the old Orthodoxy in calling the Bible a work of inspiration. Its exponents160 affirm that God has left us to our own knowledge and reason in regard to every other subject but religion and morality. They are Evolutionists in part. But the principle of Evolution must be applied161 over the whole field. Everything is natural, and happens under the universal law of causation. There are no miracles, and there never were any except in ignorant imaginations. But the death of miracles is the death of inspiration. The triumph of science involves the ruin of every supernatural system. Revelation is necessarily miraculous, and when the belief in miracles expires the death-knell rings for every Book of God. We are then left to the discipline of culture.
And what is culture? It is steeping our minds in the wisest and loveliest thoughts of all the ages. And each of us may thus make his own Bible for himself—a true Bible of Humanity.
The End
The End
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
remarkable
|
|
| adj.显著的，异常的，非凡的，值得注意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
Christian
|
|
| adj.基督教徒的；n.基督教徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
extravagant
|
|
| adj.奢侈的；过分的；(言行等)放肆的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
4
ethics
|
|
| n.伦理学；伦理观，道德标准 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
5
decadence
|
|
| n.衰落，颓废 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
6
deity
|
|
| n.神，神性；被奉若神明的人(或物) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
7
virtues
|
|
| 美德( virtue的名词复数 )； 德行； 优点； 长处 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
8
savor
|
|
| vt.品尝，欣赏；n.味道，风味；情趣，趣味 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
9
panegyrics
|
|
| n.赞美( panegyric的名词复数 )；称颂；颂词；颂扬的演讲或文章 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
10
sublimity
|
|
| 崇高，庄严，气质高尚 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
11
essentially
|
|
| adv.本质上，实质上，基本上 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
12
vices
|
|
| 缺陷( vice的名词复数 )； 恶习； 不道德行为； 台钳 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
13
accomplishment
|
|
| n.完成，成就，（pl.）造诣，技能 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
14
quotations
|
|
| n.引用( quotation的名词复数 )；[商业]行情（报告）；（货物或股票的）市价；时价 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
15
distinguished
|
|
| adj.卓越的，杰出的，著名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
16
simplicity
|
|
| n.简单，简易；朴素；直率，单纯 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
17
rhetoric
|
|
| n.修辞学，浮夸之言语 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
18
defender
|
|
| n.保卫者，拥护者，辩护人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
19
scripture
|
|
| n.经文，圣书，手稿；Scripture:(常用复数)《圣经》，《圣经》中的一段 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
20
scriptures
|
|
| 经文，圣典( scripture的名词复数 )； 经典 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
21
supreme
|
|
| adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
22
remarkably
|
|
| ad.不同寻常地，相当地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
23
specially
|
|
| adv.特定地；特殊地；明确地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
24
subdued
|
|
| adj. 屈服的，柔和的，减弱的 动词subdue的过去式和过去分词 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
25
persecution
|
|
| n. 迫害,烦扰 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
26
imprisonment
|
|
| n.关押，监禁，坐牢 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
27
assassination
|
|
| n.暗杀；暗杀事件 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
28
reverence
|
|
| n.敬畏，尊敬，尊严；Reverence:对某些基督教神职人员的尊称；v.尊敬，敬畏，崇敬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
29
kindles
|
|
| （使某物）燃烧，着火( kindle的第三人称单数 )； 激起（感情等）； 发亮，放光 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
30
aspirations
|
|
| 强烈的愿望( aspiration的名词复数 )； 志向； 发送气音； 发 h 音 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
31
nominal
|
|
| adj.名义上的；(金额、租金)微不足道的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
32
Christians
|
|
| n.基督教徒( Christian的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
33
disdain
|
|
| n.鄙视，轻视；v.轻视，鄙视，不屑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
34
testament
|
|
| n.遗嘱；证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
35
eulogy
|
|
| n.颂词；颂扬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
36
drawn
|
|
| v.拖，拉，拔出；adj.憔悴的，紧张的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
37
tempted
|
|
| v.怂恿（某人）干不正当的事；冒…的险（tempt的过去分词） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
38
chapels
|
|
| n.小教堂， （医院、监狱等的）附属礼拜堂( chapel的名词复数 )；（在小教堂和附属礼拜堂举行的）礼拜仪式 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
39
ostensible
|
|
| adj.(指理由)表面的，假装的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
40
initiate
|
|
| vt.开始，创始，发动；启蒙，使入门；引入 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
41
alterations
|
|
| n.改动( alteration的名词复数 )；更改；变化；改变 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
42
strictly
|
|
| adv.严厉地，严格地；严密地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
43
archaic
|
|
| adj.(语言、词汇等)古代的，已不通用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
44
marsh
|
|
| n.沼泽，湿地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
45
devout
|
|
| adj.虔诚的，虔敬的，衷心的 (n.devoutness) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
46
colloquial
|
|
| adj.口语的，会话的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
47
consecrated
|
|
| adj.神圣的，被视为神圣的v.把…奉为神圣，给…祝圣( consecrate的过去式和过去分词 )；奉献 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
48
naive
|
|
| adj.幼稚的，轻信的；天真的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
49
infinitely
|
|
| adv.无限地，无穷地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
50
conspicuously
|
|
| ad.明显地，惹人注目地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
51
entirely
|
|
| ad.全部地，完整地；完全地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
52
secular
|
|
| n.牧师，凡人；adj.世俗的，现世的，不朽的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
53
profane
|
|
| adj.亵神的，亵渎的；vt.亵渎，玷污 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
54
astounding
|
|
| adj.使人震惊的vt.使震惊，使大吃一惊astound的现在分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
55
monstrous
|
|
| adj.巨大的；恐怖的；可耻的，丢脸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
56
supremacy
|
|
| n.至上；至高权力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
57
winding
|
|
| n.绕，缠，绕组，线圈 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
58
partisan
|
|
| adj.党派性的；游击队的；n.游击队员；党徒 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
59
testimony
|
|
| n.证词；见证，证明 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
60
jumbled
|
|
| adj.混乱的；杂乱的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
61
futility
|
|
| n.无用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
62
witchcraft
|
|
| n.魔法，巫术 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
63
concise
|
|
| adj.简洁的，简明的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
64
demonstration
|
|
| n.表明，示范，论证，示威 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
65
condemns
|
|
| v.（通常因道义上的原因而）谴责( condemn的第三人称单数 )；宣判；宣布…不能使用；迫使…陷于不幸的境地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
66
eternity
|
|
| n.不朽，来世；永恒，无穷 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
67
testimonies
|
|
| （法庭上证人的）证词( testimony的名词复数 )； 证明，证据 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
68
formulated
|
|
| v.构想出( formulate的过去式和过去分词 )；规划；确切地阐述；用公式表示 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
69
authoritative
|
|
| adj.有权威的，可相信的；命令式的；官方的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
70
speculations
|
|
| n.投机买卖( speculation的名词复数 )；思考；投机活动；推断 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
71
reverently
|
|
| adv.虔诚地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
72
noted
|
|
| adj.著名的，知名的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
73
endorse
|
|
| vt.(支票、汇票等)背书，背署；批注；同意 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
74
wince
|
|
| n.畏缩，退避，（因痛苦，苦恼等)面部肌肉抽动；v.畏缩，退缩，退避 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
75
winced
|
|
| 赶紧避开，畏缩( wince的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
76
stoic
|
|
| n.坚忍克己之人，禁欲主义者 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
77
incapable
|
|
| adj.无能力的，不能做某事的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
78
gratuitously
|
|
| 平白 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
79
graceful
|
|
| adj.优美的，优雅的；得体的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
80
concessions
|
|
| n.（尤指由政府或雇主给予的）特许权( concession的名词复数 )；承认；减价；（在某地的）特许经营权 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
81
reign
|
|
| n.统治时期，统治，支配，盛行；v.占优势 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
82
devoid
|
|
| adj.全无的，缺乏的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
83
intelligible
|
|
| adj.可理解的，明白易懂的，清楚的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
84
sneered
|
|
| 讥笑，冷笑( sneer的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
85
abject
|
|
| adj.极可怜的，卑屈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
86
clergy
|
|
| n.[总称]牧师，神职人员 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
87
contemptible
|
|
| adj.可鄙的，可轻视的，卑劣的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
88
Vogue
|
|
| n.时髦，时尚；adj.流行的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
89
rebuked
|
|
| 责难或指责( rebuke的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
90
disdained
|
|
| 鄙视( disdain的过去式和过去分词 )； 不屑于做，不愿意做 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
91
sarcasm
|
|
| n.讥讽，讽刺，嘲弄，反话 （adj.sarcastic） | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
92
excellence
|
|
| n.优秀，杰出，(pl.)优点，美德 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
93
citation
|
|
| n.引用，引证，引用文；传票 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
94
miraculous
|
|
| adj.像奇迹一样的，不可思议的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
95
creed
|
|
| n.信条；信念，纲领 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
96
immortality
|
|
| n.不死，不朽 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
97
positively
|
|
| adv.明确地，断然，坚决地；实在，确实 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
98
doomed
|
|
| 命定的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
99
remains
|
|
| n.剩余物，残留物；遗体，遗迹 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
100
continentals
|
|
| n.（欧洲）大陆人( continental的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
101
provincial
|
|
| adj.省的，地方的；n．外省人，乡下人 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
102
admiration
|
|
| n.钦佩，赞美，羡慕 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
103
banal
|
|
| adj.陈腐的，平庸的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
104
indifference
|
|
| n.不感兴趣，不关心，冷淡，不在乎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
105
multiplication
|
|
| n.增加，增多，倍增；增殖，繁殖；乘法 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
106
incessant
|
|
| adj.不停的，连续的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
107
stimulus
|
|
| n.刺激，刺激物，促进因素，引起兴奋的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
108
humble
|
|
| adj.谦卑的，恭顺的；地位低下的；v.降低，贬低 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
109
fortitude
|
|
| n.坚忍不拔；刚毅 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
110
heroism
|
|
| n.大无畏精神，英勇 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
111
massacre
|
|
| n.残杀，大屠杀；v.残杀，集体屠杀 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
112
sublime
|
|
| adj.崇高的，伟大的；极度的，不顾后果的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
113
quailed
|
|
| 害怕，发抖，畏缩( quail的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
114
slain
|
|
| 杀死，宰杀，杀戮( slay的过去分词 )； (slay的过去分词) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
115
defiance
|
|
| n.挑战，挑衅，蔑视，违抗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
116
obstinacy
|
|
| n.顽固；（病痛等）难治 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
117
brutal
|
|
| adj.残忍的，野蛮的，不讲理的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
118
covenanting
|
|
| v.立约，立誓( covenant的现在分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
|
119
psalm
|
|
| n.赞美诗，圣诗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
120
psalms
|
|
| n.赞美诗( psalm的名词复数 )；圣诗；圣歌；(中的) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
121
derives
|
|
| v.得到( derive的第三人称单数 )；（从…中）得到获得；源于；（从…中）提取 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
122
reminder
|
|
| n.提醒物，纪念品；暗示，提示 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
123
piety
|
|
| n.虔诚，虔敬 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
124
stimulated
|
|
| a.刺激的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
125
perfectly
|
|
| adv.完美地，无可非议地，彻底地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
126
dint
|
|
| n.由于，靠；凹坑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
127
glosses
|
|
| n.（页末或书后的）注释( gloss的名词复数 )；（表面的）光滑；虚假的外表；用以产生光泽的物质v.注解( gloss的第三人称单数 )；掩饰（错误）；粉饰；把…搪塞过去 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
128
imposture
|
|
| n.冒名顶替，欺骗 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
129
obstinate
|
|
| adj.顽固的，倔强的，不易屈服的，较难治愈的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
130
credulous
|
|
| adj.轻信的，易信的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
131
absurdities
|
|
| n.极端无理性( absurdity的名词复数 )；荒谬；谬论；荒谬的行为 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
132
patronage
|
|
| n.赞助，支援，援助；光顾，捧场 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
133
pretensions
|
|
| 自称( pretension的名词复数 )； 自命不凡； 要求； 权力 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
134
peculiar
|
|
| adj.古怪的，异常的；特殊的，特有的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
135
felons
|
|
| n.重罪犯( felon的名词复数 )；瘭疽；甲沟炎；指头脓炎 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
136
indignity
|
|
| n.侮辱，伤害尊严，轻蔑 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
137
facetiously
|
|
| adv.爱开玩笑地；滑稽地，爱开玩笑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
138
imprisoned
|
|
| 下狱，监禁( imprison的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
139
infamous
|
|
| adj.声名狼藉的，臭名昭著的，邪恶的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
140
hypocrisy
|
|
| n.伪善，虚伪 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
141
subsists
|
|
| v.（靠很少的钱或食物）维持生活，生存下去( subsist的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
142
lauded
|
|
| v.称赞，赞美( laud的过去式和过去分词 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
143
ridicule
|
|
| v.讥讽，挖苦；n.嘲弄 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
144
acting
|
|
| n.演戏，行为，假装；adj.代理的，临时的，演出用的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
145
undoubtedly
|
|
| adv.确实地，无疑地 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
146
pathos
|
|
| n.哀婉，悲怆 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
147
alleged
|
|
| a.被指控的，嫌疑的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
148
fecund
|
|
| adj.多产的，丰饶的，肥沃的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
149
abounds
|
|
| v.大量存在，充满，富于( abound的第三人称单数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
150
appreciation
|
|
| n.评价；欣赏；感谢；领会，理解；价格上涨 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
151
wilful
|
|
| adj.任性的，故意的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
152
creeds
|
|
| （尤指宗教）信条，教条( creed的名词复数 ) | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
153
apprise
|
|
| vt.通知，告知 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
154
wayfaring
|
|
| adj.旅行的n.徒步旅行 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
155
clog
|
|
| vt.塞满，阻塞；n.[常pl.]木屐 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
156
filth
|
|
| n.肮脏，污物，污秽；淫猥 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
157
extricate
|
|
| v.拯救，救出；解脱 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
158
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： |
|
|
|
|
159
uncertainty
|
|
| n.易变，靠不住，不确知，不确定的事物 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
160
exponents
|
|
| n.倡导者( exponent的名词复数 )；说明者；指数；能手 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
161
applied
|
|
| adj.应用的；v.应用，适用 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
| 欢迎访问英文小说网 |