Page:Popular Science Monthly Volume 39.djvu/520

From Wikisource
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This page has been proofread, but needs to be validated.
504
THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY.

quiry whether we have to record in this case the existence of an exception to the general character of our Lord's ministry, which was both beneficent and law-abiding. So far as regards the taking of animal life, the matter need not be discussed. It was life destined to be taken, taken by violence and probably with greater pain. It may have been, undoubtedly, the highest practical assertion of power, which is recorded by the Evangelists. But there is a remaining question, namely, whether this assertion of power was such as to involve serious injury to the proprietary rights of innocent persons. This is the character which Prof. Huxley stamps upon the narrative; justly, as he thinks, but, as I hold, in defiance of historical authority, and of the laws of rational and probable interpretation. I can not, however, but agree with him on two points which appear to be important: namely, first, that the excision on moral grounds of this narrative from the Synoptic Gospels affects their credit as a whole, and, secondly, that it is material to know whether the act recorded involved the infliction of a heavy penalty upon conduct in itself innocent.

The first question that arises in approaching this inquiry is, where did the miracle take place? And I do not well understand how Mr. Huxley, or his authorities, have so readily arrived at the conclusion that the very existence of any place named Gergesa is very questionable.[1] Origen was a learned man, of critical mind, and he resided for a large part of his life in Palestine, and traveled there only two centuries after the time of our Lord.[2] He tells us expressly these three things:

1. That there was an ancient city named Gergesa on the Lake of Tiberias.

2. That, bordering on the water, there was a precipitous descent, which it appears, or is proved (δείκνυΤαι), that the swine descended.

3. That Gadara is indeed a city of Judæa, with very famous baths, but has no precipitous ground in the vicinity of water.[3]

This statement from such a source, at such a date, appears to require a treatment much more careful than the dictum that the existence of Gergesa is "very questionable." I admit, however, my obligation under the circumstances to inquire also, and fully, into the case of Gadara.

Let me now summarily point out what I conceive to be the main sources of error, which, taken together, vitiate the entire argument of Prof. Huxley.

1. Throughout the paper he confounds together what I had


  1. Nineteenth Century, December, 1890, p. 972.
  2. See also McClellan's New Testament, on Matt, viii, 28, for the testimony of St. Jerome.
  3. Orig., Comment, in Joann., p. 145.