Continued: Chapter I-The Chronological Suspension Bridge


In this rapid survey of the conclusions which Dr. Wilson drew from the facts, I have passed over his presentation and evaluation of them. As stated before, it is utterly impossible for me to incorporate the whys and the wherefores, the pros and the cons, in such a limited space as I have. I wish to urge everyone who is disturbed about these so-called objections brought, upon historical grounds, against the book of Daniel to procure the two volumes of Dr. Wilson's Studies in the Book of Daniel and to investigate these questions for himself. I am confident that no honest, conscientious, sincere true-seeker, who is willing to look facts squarely in the face, and who will study the evidence which Dr. Wilson arrays, can still doubt for a second the genuineness of the book of Daniel as a production coming from such a character as Daniel, who lived at the time mentioned throughout the work. Our only appeal to those who want the truth is to study these volumes of Dr. Wilson. His arguments are unanswerable. Others have discussed the issues involved and have shown the unreasonableness of the critical hypothesis concerning this most marvelous and wonderful book.

Thus from a prophetic and from a historical standpoint all the evidence presented in Daniel proves conclusively that it was written by the Spirit of God and by one who unfolded before his contemporaries the course of history through the centuries. The book of Daniel, therefore, may be relied upon in every particular for guidance and instruction.

In our discussion throughout this chapter we have seen that the two piers upon which our chronological suspension bridge is resting are made of the solid rock of historical facts and prophetic truths that have been verified by fulfilment. We can, therefore, proceed with the construction of this bridge with all confidence of reaching the facts of the case and determining the date of Messiah's first appearance upon earth for carrying out His redemptive career.


III. A TEST CASE

Under sections I and II the investigation has proceeded upon the assumption that both Genesis and Daniel are the very Word of God given by the infallible inspiration of the Holy Spirit. A corollary to this proposition is that, if these books were thus given, they present a truthful account of what actually transpired--records upon which we can rely absolutely. A second corollary to this general proposition is that these writings mean what they say and say what they mean and are thus to be understood. During this discussion emphasis has been placed upon the necessity of observing the golden rule of interpretation, which is this: "When the plain sense of Scripture makes common sense, seek no other sense; therefore, take every word at its primary, ordinary, usual, literal meaning unless the facts of the context indicate clearly otherwise."

In the first section we have also discovered clear intimations that Genesis is indeed a composite document, not in the sense as is ordinarily understood by the critical school, but in that way which is demanded by the plain sense of the oft-recurring formula "These are the generations of--------------." We have, furthermore, learned that Genesis fits into the world situation as it has been revealed by archaeology (and not, as has been supposed, by theorists in the class room), just as a piece of a jig-saw puzzle fits into its proper place without being forced or changed in any way. We have also seen that various statements and the necessary inferences to be drawn therefrom are in perfect accord with the latest discoveries in the scientific realm. These facts and many others have convinced us that the primary assumption relative to these records and their being the Word of God has been amply and thoroughly demonstrated.

In our study of Daniel we have dealt with it as the very Word of God. Its predictions covering a period of 2500 years have been fulfilled literally. By this fact our faith has been confirmed that these Oracles were inspired by the Spirit of God. In addition to the positive proof afforded by predictions and their fulfilment, we have noted some of the negative criticisms launched against the book of Daniel and have seen that they are without force, and that all have been answered.

The critics tell us that the Torah (Pentateuch) was not written by Moses, but that it is a composite document produced by editors of the exilic and postexilic periods. These unknown authors came into possession of certain documents, which are now designated as "E," "J," "P," and "D." After doing certain editorial revision upon their sources, they welded them together and produced the Torah as we have it today. There are some, however, who do not confine this theory to the first five books of the Scriptures but rather to the first six (hexateuch). By the same principles of literary analysis they dissect most of the books of the Tenach (Old Testament). According to these experts, Moses, for instance, did not write Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy, although we find some statements in them asserting that he did. These late redactors, according to the theory, presented to the public under the magnetic name of Moses, the material which they received, and which they worked over. By this method they gained a hearty reception for their literary fraud. Such a dissection of the books of the Hebrew Scriptures deprives us of these divine Oracles and has reduced them, in the minds of many people, to the low level of human productions, in which are many mistakes and errors.

Since these critical scholars are so very positive concerning the correctness of the conclusions to which they have come, it is but proper and right that they should by an actual demonstration prove to the world their ability to restore original documents out of which a composite one has been made. Their laborious vivisection of the early books of the Scriptures is so very minute in every detail that the average uninformed person would attribute to them exact scientific knowledge. But are they able by their critical analysis to restore the so-called original sources and tell us who wrote this portion, and what writer composed another section? Can they demonstrate to us that their critical analysis is accurate and do it in such a way that we may be absolutely certain of the correctness of their conclusions? If they are, every honest-hearted truth-seeker wants to know. On the other hand, if they are unable to do what they claim, it is nothing but proper and right that people should know they cannot make their claim good. Can we test, therefore, their ability? Shall we not allow them to demonstrate the accuracy of their deductions and the scientific character of their work? They certainly should be given an opportunity to convince us that they are right, and that their principles are scientific.

In order that they may do this, I am herewith submitting a composite document which is the result of editorial revision of certain original essays. These were written by different people in various walks of life; were, in-turn, subjected to editorial revision, emendation; and finally were welded together into the present document. The original compositions and all papers used in the editorial work performed in welding them together are preserved in a fireproof lock-box here in Los Angeles. From these documents every step taken in the entire process of revision and compilation, until the final document was produced, may be observed.

Since our critical friends insist that they have the ability to dissect ancient literary works coming from a world far removed from ours, with its oriental civilization and outlook, the labor to dissect and restore the original documents which lie behind the one I am submitting, will, of course, be far easier than the task of restoring the primary sources of documents coming to us from the ancient world.

If any scholar or any number of them will restore the original documents and point out the work of the various editors who have shared in the production of this present one and will accept this challenge to do so, I shall be glad to publish in the Biblical Research Monthly, the official organ of the Biblical Research Society, their findings. After the leading exponents of this school of thought have had ample time to complete the work and have submitted to me a draft of "the assured results of their scientific criticism," I then shall publish the original documents with the notes and revisions as they appear in the lock-box of a fireproof vault at the present day.

If these gentlemen will only demonstrate to us that they with their critical apparatus are able to do what they assert, it is due them and the world to know about it. On the other hand, if they are not able, we also have a right to learn of their inability to make their claims good.

I appeal to the entire critical school to accept this challenge and demonstrate to the world that these literary experts can do what they claim.

Herewith I assert that we have in the vault here in Los Angeles the original documents and all other papers which were used in the development of the following one. I call upon them to analyze this one critically. There are tens of thousands of people who will eagerly await someone to accept the challenge and to demonstrate the truthfulness of the claims of the critical school. Gentlemen, who will come forward and pick up the gauntlet?

A COMPOSITE DOCUMENT

The history of Abraham, the friend of God, is recorded in Genesis 11:27 to 25:19. All of the various incidents recorded are connected and constitute one literary whole. But the account of the war recorded in Genesis 14, in which Abraham took a vital part, is of particular interest to every Bible student, because we have our first synchronism with profane history.

About the year 1900 B.C. four kings of the East made war against five kings of the West. The East in this instance refers to the land bordering on the Tigris and the Euphrates rivers north of the Persian Gulf, and the West refers to the land of Palestine. Chedorlaomer of Elam, the most powerful eastern ruler of the day, was the head of the eastern confederacy, which included Amraphel, king of Shinar, Arioch, king of Ellasar, and Tidal, king of nations, who was a chief of various wandering tribes. The western confederacy was made up of five powerful leaders, Bera, king of Sodom, Birsha, king of Gomorrah, Shinab, king of Admah, Shemeber, king of Zeboiim and the king of Bela, which is Zoar.

After being under the Elamite yoke for 12 years the kings of the Jordan valley rebelled in the 13th year. Evidently there was great dissatisfaction which caused these five petty kings to attempt to match swords with their overlord and his powerful associates.

The story of Abraham and Lot is continued from Genesis 13 in the one under consideration. This episode is the first instance of actual war in the Bible. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness" (II Tim. 3:16). In this chapter we are "instructed in righteousness" by the magnanimous loyalty displayed by Abram to Lot, who had selfishly chosen the well-watered plain of the Jordan, when they separated one from the other because of their great flocks and herds, and the consequent quarrels of their herdsmen. Abraham's disregard for the past and his great concern for Lot, who was then in dire trouble, was a great opportunity for a closer fellowship with his Lord, which meant victory and blessing to him. The magnanimous loyalty displayed by him to his nephew could well be emulated today.

The record of the war is similar to that of a modern newspaper report. There were four kings, of whom Chedorlaomer of Elam evidently was most powerful, for during the space of twelve years five other kings served him, but rebelled in the thirteenth. Though this report is somewhat similar to modern accounts of war, it is absolutely different from them, for it was given by "a holy man of old," who wrote the book of Genesis under the guidance and power of the Holy Spirit. The reason it is given is that it had special reference to Abraham in his relation to Lot, who, it will be recalled "chose him all the plain of Jordan" when he and Abraham discussed the matter of separating one from the other. This friction was due to the fact that both of these men were rich in flocks and herds, and their herdsmen strove one with the other. Hence Lot pitched his tent toward Sodom, as the Word declares, and soon moved into that wicked city and became a part of its life and civilization. But Abraham dwelt in the hill-country.

The battle took place in the Vale of Siddim, which was full of slime pits. The conflict issued in the victory of Chedorlaomer and his allies, who sacked the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. The spoils were seized and many of the people, including Lot were taken as hostages. Realizing that God is righteous and always overrules and punishes sin in every form, we can see the hand of God in this incident. Lot, though a righteous man, had no business living in such a city. Man must not deceive himself, for God is not mocked; whatsoever he sows he shall reap. Although this carnal child of God was in trouble and was being punished for his sins, the Lord had mercy upon him and providentially rescued him, using Abraham against whom he had sinned.

One wonders what were Lot's thoughts after he was captured and was being led as an exile into a foreign land. Did it occur to him that possibly God was permitting this misfortune to overtake him in punishment of his sins? Often we meditate on the more serious problems of life only when we are brought to our extremity. This should be a lesson to everyone who claims to be a child of God.

One of the escaped captives told Abram what had happened. When this venerable patriarch in this way learned the sad news relative to his nephew's troubles, he, in a most gracious and bold manner went to his assistance. At once this godly, practical man mustered his 318 men, rallied his allies, and with the strategy of a modern general, divided his small army to make it appear larger and then went in pursuit of Lot's captors. It is altogether possible that the reinforcements which Abram doubtless obtained from his neighbors augmented his forces until they numbered an army of at least 1000 men. This was the only practical thing for a man like Abram to do. He could, consistently with his idea of separation from the world unto God, join forces with the Canaanites in such an emergency. God uses the wicked to praise Himself. At various times he employed one pagan nation to punish another when the latter was no longer plastic in His hands.

Abram showed his generalship by dividing his small forces and by making a bold surprise attack by night, when the enemy was least expecting such a stroke. The rapidity and the strength with which he struck threw the foes into consternation. It is quite likely, though one may not be positive, that the main body of the army of the victors was far in advance of the baggage train which was bearing the spoils and hostages to a land far away. In this case, Abram made a surprise night attack with lightning rapidity against the rear guard and completely vanquished it, recapturing the prisoners of war and the material goods in their possession. In triumph, yet in humility, this great man of God returned with the recovered goods and captives.

At this point of the narrative, rather abruptly, a mysterious character, designated as a priest of the Most High God, is introduced. His name is Melchizedek, who was "king of Salem." His name etymologically means "king of righteousness." He was king of Salem, which means peace. It is supposed that the early form of the name Jerusalem, in which Melchizedek reigned, was Ur-salem. The meaning, in this case, would be "city of peace."

After getting a glimpse of Melchizedek in this passage, we never hear of him again until David by inspiration wrote Psalm 110, which makes him a type of the Hebrew Messiah. A lapse of 2000 years after this episode brings us to the time when this same mysterious character is pointed out as the one after whom the priesthood of the Messiah is patterned.

Returning from the slaughter of the kings Abram was met by this priest-king, who was representative of God Most High, possessor of heaven and earth. This man of God brought bread and wine out to Abraham, meeting him in the Vale of Shaveh, which is the Kings' Vale. On this occasion, he blessed Abraham in the name of Jehovah the Almighty. Being true to his convictions as a servant of God, Abram paid to Melchizedek tithes of all that he had.

This is the first time we have the word "priest" (cohen) in the Bible. It is the word later applied to the Levitical priesthood. The patriarchs seem to have had no other priests than the head of the family. But here we find one designated a special priest and empowered to solemnly bless Abraham.

The bread and the wine which Melchizedek gave Abraham were refreshing and comforting to Abraham, and he was thus strengthened to meet another enemy--the king of Sodom, who was clearly a subtle foe. Although he had paid tithes to the priest, for the maintenance of the services of God, Abraham refused to have anything to do with the king of Sodom. This act of faith brought him into possession of even greater blessings from the hand of the Lord. When one, emulating Abraham's faith, steps out upon the promises of God, He will never disappoint him.

Abraham ran a great risk in rescuing Lot and the goods from the retreating army. He doubtless had incurred the displeasure of the king of Sodom in his refusing to accept the gift which he most graciously offered him as compensation for what he had done. When such generosity is thus rebuffed, usually a sting is left. Abram realized this fact. Nevertheless, he refused to accept any tainted goods from him, king of one of the most wicked cities that has ever existed.

Immediately after this episode, the Lord appeared to Abraham and assured him that he needed not to be afraid, for He declared that He was his shield and exceeding great reward. In other words, the Almighty promised to protect him from any and all dangers and to give him everything that he needed, since he had by faith refused wealth stained with sin. God will be a shield and the exceeding great reward to anyone who will act as did Abraham and walk in His footsteps.*


Footnote:
* The reader is to remember that the composite document given above is made up of different essays by various writers. Of course, I do not necessarily approve of each statement of the different authors, though they are excellent people.







End Of Chapter I.