A Comparative View of Religions — A Reader’s Guide

A Psychological, Not Historical, Scheme

Scholten explicitly states that the history of religion must review various forms “in the order of psychological development.” This is not a chronological account but a logical progression from passive dependence to self-conscious freedom. The earliest periods, he admits, lie beyond historical investigation. Thus, fetichism and nature-worship are treated as the lowest rung, followed by Buddhism and Greek deification of the human, with Christianity as the culmination. Readers should note that Islam is dismissed as derivative, borrowing from Israel and Christianity. The scheme is teleological: each stage is judged by its approximation to the Christian ideal of inner divine rule.

Evidence from Semitic and Israelite Religion

Scholten devotes considerable space to arguing that Israelite religion originated in the same soil as other Semitic faiths. He marshals five linguistic and ritual clues: the interchange of Baal and El in names like Jerubboseth; Abraham’s willingness to sacrifice Isaac as a vestige of human sacrifice; circumcision as a bloody symbol; the right of Jahveh to the first-born requiring ransom; and fire imagery for Jahveh. He also notes ox symbols in the temple and cherubim. These details, he claims, point to an earlier nature-religion common to Semites, from which Abraham’s family gradually rose to a higher moral conception.

The Persistence of Heterodox Worship

To support his thesis, Scholten cites the persistent sympathy for Baal and Molech among Israelites, Jephthah’s sacrifice of his daughter, and the custom of worship on high places. He argues that even after Moses, the feeling that Jahveh’s wrath required human blood remained, as seen in David’s actions. The heterodox calf-worship in the northern kingdom further shows that the old nature-religion was never fully eradicated. Scholten uses these examples to demonstrate that Israel’s religion evolved from a common Semitic base, not in isolation. The evidence is drawn from biblical texts, but he treats them as historical records of religious development.

Reading with Scholten’s Argument in Mind

Because the excerpts are incomplete, the full scope of Scholten’s comparative method is unclear. He mentions fetichism, the Chinese, and Egyptians in chapter headings, but the provided text focuses on Semitic and Israelite material. Readers should expect a similar pattern for other religions: each is placed on the developmental ladder and analyzed for traces of earlier stages. Scholten’s language is precise and often footnoted with biblical references. The work is not a neutral survey but a sustained argument for Christianity as the most perfect religion, with other faiths judged by their proximity to that ideal.

Scholten’s book rewards careful attention to his use of biblical evidence and his psychological framework. The excerpts show a scholar who treats religious texts as data for a developmental theory, not as sacred documents. Readers interested in 19th-century comparative religion or the intellectual background of liberal Protestantism will find this a concise, provocative statement. The incomplete text leaves many questions unanswered, but the argument’s structure is clear from the opening pages.

Holding this old comparative study, I recalled evenings tracing my own family's faith shifts, generation by generation. The way Scholten maps spiritual evolution felt like watching sediment settle. The Religion of Babylonia and Assyria — Background and Themes once gave me that same quiet ache—not of conclusion, but of recognizing how deeply every river of belief shares one hidden source.