Quackery in Hebrew Exposed.
By Editor
SOME time since, there was sent to us an article first published in the Popular Science Monthly, in which the writer attempted to prove that our translation of Genesis, in which is given the age of the patriarchs, is incorrect; that the true reading of the Hebrew makes Adam's age 139 years instead of 930. We were well aware that it was incorrect, and laid it aside for examination, but before we found time to attend to it, the editor of the Review and Herald had referred it to Dr. Harper, who is undisputed authority on such questions, and received the following answer:— ELDER URIAH SMITH:
Dear Brother,— The article referred to has already been called to my attention several times. I can only say in reference to it; 1. That subsequent numbers of the Popular Science Monthly contained replies to this article, and that it would only be fair if those papers which published the article would also publish the reply. 2. That no more false conception of Hebrew syntax could be penned than that which lies at the foundation of the article. The writer shows himself to be lamentably ignorant of the most common principles of the language. A more brazen, unreliable, unscholarly statement could not well be imagined. It is so absurd as to be unworthy of a reply. Yours truly,
W. R. HARPER,
Baptist Union Theological Seminary, Chicago, Ill.