In the N. Y. Observer, Professor Shedd, of Union Seminary, gives the following clear statement of the real point at issue in the controversy as to the authorship of the Pentateuch:— "There are two views of the Old Testament; the historical or traditional, and the rationalistic or critical, so called. The one is held by the church, the other is held by parties and individuals, sometimes within the church and sometimes outside of it. "The historical or traditional view is: That the books of the Old Testament are the infallible word of God communicated to a small circle selected out of the people of Israel for this purpose. Certain holy men of old spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. These books, consequently, do not contain the religious ideas of the Hebrew race, but the teachings of the Supreme Being. The Old Testament, though Hebrew in language and modes of expression and forms of thought, is not Hebrew literature, but divine revelation; because literature, properly so called, is the natural and spontaneous product of a national mind. Originated in this manner, the Old Testament religion, unlike the natural and national religions of the world, is homogeneous in its nature. It is pure monotheism, from first to last; from Genesis to Malachi. From beginning to end, also, it contains the promise and the doctrine of a Redeemer, and of redemption. There is no polytheism, deism, or pantheism in the religion of Israel, as enunciated by Moses and the prophets. The Hebrew people themselves, from time to time, were more or less idolatrous and deistical, but the religion which Jehovah gave them through inspired individuals had nothing of this tincture. In brief, the Old Testament is a revelation, not an evolution; a revelation from the divine mind, and not an evolution of the Hebrew mind. "The rationalistic or critical view is: That the books of the Old Testament are the product of the common Hebrew mind, as this spontaneously developed in a national literature from age to age. The religion of Israel, like the religions of Babylon and Assyria, of Egypt and India, of Greece and Rome, has no uniform and homogeneous character. It begins, like all human religions, in polytheism, and passes gradually upward into monotheism. "This theory supposes that there was no supernatural revelation of religious truth to the Hebrew people, but only that ordinary unfolding of man's religious nature, which is common to every nation. The books of the Old Testament are a history of this unfolding in the case of the Hebrews, and are no more infallible and entitled to be the rule of religious faith for all mankind than any other books or literatures which contain similar accounts of national religions. In brief, the Old Testament is an evolution, and not a revelation; an evolution of the Hebrew mind, and not a revelation from the divine mind. "Such are the two views of the Old Testament. They are antagonistic in every fiber. In the entire history of opinions, there are no two theories that are more hostile and deadly to each other than these. The latter of these two views calls itself the 'critical' theory, but the method by which it is attempted to be established is wholly uncritical."