[Sidenote: The Authority of the Scriptures Weakened.]

When we ask what foundation is weakened, the answer is: The authority of
the Scriptures as the sole rule of faith and practice. Some claim that
only a few of the books are genuine and almost none authentic. If this
is to be the final judgment of the learned and the sincere, it is plain
that we must seek another foundation for faith than the word of
Scripture. It is no more a "Thus saith the Lord" for us.

[Sidenote: Critics not yet Agreed.]

[Sidenote: Archæology and the Bible.]

[Sidenote: Personal Standpoints.]

But we are very far from seeing that final agreement among the critics
which warrants us in discarding a single book. If any one has been
fought about, and fought over, it is the Gospel of John. "It used to be
said that this was not a history at all, but an idealizing of tradition
in the interest of a speculative idea;[1] now theologians are mostly
agreed that if John is the most speculative, he is, at the same time,
the most personal of New Testament writers." No other book has been
finally overthrown. Archæology has confirmed Paul, and also some Old
Testament writers, especially those who speak of widely separated
settlements of the Hittites. I get a strong impression that the New
Testament writers are sometimes attacked because they teach what the
critics do not wish to believe. Thus it would appear that Harnack scouts
the early chapters of Matthew and Luke because he doubts the virgin
birth, and would hold that belief therein is no part in authority or