4.-THE INSPIRATION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
John accompanied Jesus at the cross, and yet he does not record that bitter cry in the darkness, “Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani!” while he mentions a number of other details. A mere man would never deliberately leave this out, but if we admit that John was inspired, the reason becomes clear at once. John's Gospel is the one inspired by the Spirit of God to present Christ as the Son of God, and the human traits in His character are not prominently given. He is presented to us as calm on the cross as He is in the Garden of Gethsemane, when He said “Whom seek ye?” (John 18:4).
If space had permitted I had intended to go through John's Gospel to show how the Spirit has worked through John to present Christ as the Son of God. But read it at your leisure, remembering that this is the key, and then you must admit that John was indeed inspired when he wrote.
LUKE'S PREFACE
A common objection raised by those who disbelieve inspiration is founded upon the introduction to Luke's Gospel, the writer of which, they say, takes the ground of an eyewitness alone. “Many,” Luke says, “having taken in hand to set forth the things most surely believed among us, even as they delivered them unto us, who from the beginning were eyewitnesses of the word, it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first (παρηκολουθηκότι ἄνωθεν) to write unto thee, in order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the certainty of the things wherein thou hast been instructed” (Luke 1:2, 3, 4). Now Luke does not say a word of setting forth in order what eyewitnesses have delivered: others, he said, had done that. But this was not sufficient, and he wrote his Gospel that Theophilus might have certainty from him, who had “perfect knowledge” of all things. A clear statement, surely, that his account was infallible, and if so, undoubtedly inspired, for no human account can be infallible.
We get a confirmation of the fact that St. Luke's gospel is scripture from the fact that it is called so in a quotation in 1 Timothy 5:18, which has already been quoted— “For the scripture saith... The laborer is worthy of his reward.” This is a quotation from Luke 10:7, and is here called scripture, and appealed to as decisive authority. No fuller testimony could be given in a few words to the inspiration and authority of the third Gospel.
Many rationalists ridicule the application of the words of Hosea, “Out of Egypt have I called my Son” to Christ. But it is the system and plan of scripture to transfer passages from Israel, the provisional son, to Christ, the true Son. Matthew, therefore, uses the Old Testament scripture rightly according to the intended use of scripture: whether this plan be wise or foolish is not the question—I believe it assuredly to be divinely wise—but rationalists may not quarrel with Matthew for quoting the Old Testament thus. The substitution of the Messiah for Israel can be clearly seen in Isaiah 49, where we see the Messiah directly presented as taking the place of Israel.
Another point raised is that Paul was corrected by the course of events in his expectation of the coming of Christ. At the extreme close of his career, he urges Timothy to “keep this commandment without spot, unrebukeable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ, which in his times he shall show, who is the blessed and only Potentate” (1 Timothy 6:14), that is, he uses exactly the same language then as in his earliest Epistle— “ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God: and to wait for his Son from heaven” Thessalonians 1:10), and “I pray God your whole spirit and soul and body be preserved blameless unto the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ” (1 Thessalonians 5:23), and similar passages. No man ever knew the time, which the Father had put in His own power— “Of that day and that hour knoweth no man, neither the Son, but the Father” (Mark 13:32).
But on the other hand they were commanded to be expecting continually the return of their Master. This attitude made the difference between the faithful and unfaithful servant. Christ had marked the church's unfaithfulness by saying of the servants, “My lord delayeth his coming” (Luke 12:45): into that error Paul did not fall.
At the extreme close of his career, however, he had a revelation from the Lord that he should glorify Him in death— “I am now ready to be offered, and the time of my departure is at hand” (2 Timothy 4:6). Paul was marked as a faithful servant by expecting his Lord's return, not as an ignorant one.
THE NATURAL IGNORANCE OF THE APOSTLES
Now inspiration was a necessity owing to the fact that the disciples were in every case ignorant of the meaning of the Lord in His speech and actions. For instance, when the Lord warns against the leaven of the Pharisees, they say it was because they brought no bread. After the conversion of the Samaritan woman, when He says: “I have meat to eat that ye know not of” (John 4:32), they ask “Hath anyone brought him ought to eat?” When He tells them He should die and rise again, they say: “Be it far from thee, Lord” (Matthew 16:22). Even after His death, they say on the road to Emmaus with Him: “We trusted it had been he which should have redeemed Israel” (Luke 24:21), and many other instances could be adduced in support of my statement. Indeed John says: “These things the disciples understood not at the first: but when Jesus was glorified then remembered they that these things were written of him, and that they had done these things unto him” (John 12:16). How was it they remembered after? by the revelations of the Holy Spirit who came down to “teach them all things, and bring all things to their remembrance.”
We closed the section of this paper on the inspiration of the Old Testament with quotations declaring that the writers in some cases did not even understand what they wrote, implying unmistakably that they were inspired. Have we any such declaration in the New Testament? Should we expect it? No, because the character of New Testament inspiration is different: it is shown by the following words: “reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven” (1 Peter 1:12). He it is that leads into all truth, and inspiration acts in and by the understanding: but it is not on that account the less inspiration.
Paul preferred the inspiration which acts by the understanding to that which is apparently more independent of it: “For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.... In the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue” (1 Cor. 14:14-19). Thus Paul knew of an inspiration by which he spoke “in an unknown tongue,” but preferred the inspiration “with understanding,” and this is the character of the inspiration found in the New Testament.
DIFFICULTIES
Many rationalists state that they cannot believe the Bible because of the numerous difficulties in the word. On the contrary, I say that I should be very surprised indeed to find no difficulties: the Author is divine, I am but human, and can I be expected to understand all? “The very difficulties of scripture, philological and historical, afford cogent internal proof of the genuineness and authenticity of the Bible,” says Dr. Angus (Bible Handbook, p. 271). Let me say if I did not understand a passage that its meaning being doubtful to me, not that the meaning itself is doubtful, then let me wait on God to teach me its meaning.
Difficulties try our faith. Is not this again an evidence in their favor? What are all the dispensations of God but our discipline? What is life but a walking by faith—by habitual reliance on Him whom we cannot understand fully, and in circumstances that require such a trust?
But many difficulties melt away when we look at them at all closely, and it will be found useful to remember the following six statements—
RECAPITULATION
Recapitulating. We have seen that the inspiration of the New Testament is of a different order from that of the Old, that nevertheless the writers give ample testimony to their inspiration, that the whole of the New Testament books form one harmonious whole, each book fitting in one with the other so as to present a complete guide to the Christian in any circumstance in which he may be found, that the Gospels do not present the same view of Christ, and that therefore they do not all give the same incidents, or even the same details of the incidents they relate in common, that the introduction to Luke, the use of quotations from the Old Testament, and the alleged “change of views” of the Apostle Paul do not in any way affect the claim to inspiration, and lastly that the disciples heeded guidance from the Holy Ghost, since they did not understand the purport of the Lord's teaching, while He was here.
(1) We have an original text somewhat mutilated by copying and translation, but only to a very limited extent.
(2) The suggestion that inspiration is not verbal destroys the absolute authority of the Bible— “it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than for one tittle of the law to fail (Luke 16:17).
(3) In any divergence between two accounts of an event only direct contradictions can afford any proof against inspiration (but see (1)).
(4) Silence is no proof of ignorance—see John's declaration, “There are also many other things which Jesus did, the which, if they were written every one, I suppose that even the world itself could not contain the books, that should be written” (John 21:25).
(5) The events narrated in the Gospels are not arranged in chronological order.
(6) Statements which are apparently contradictory may record different facts, e.g., the feeding of the five thousand, and again later of the four thousand, often confused as one.
Let us take two examples: Matthew 1:1-16 gives our Lord's genealogy, and another genealogy occurs in Luke 3:23-38. The two genealogies are different because the one in Matthew traces the descent through Joseph in the royal line (as son of David), and the one in Luke through Mary, in the natural descent from Adam (as son of man).
Again, John states that Christ was before Pilate's tribunal “about the sixth hour” (John 19:14). Matthew, Mark and Luke record the fact that He was on the cross “about the sixth hour” (Matthew 27:45; Mark 15:33; Luke 23:44). There is no real discrepancy here, for John calculated hours according to the Roman method, the “Synoptists” according to the Jewish method. The sixth hour was, therefore, with him 6 a.m.; with them it would be noon.
Finally, let no man attempt or expect the explanation of every difficulty. “The last step of reason,” says Pascal, “is to know that there is an infinitude of things which surpass it.” “After all difficulties have been solved, and every word of the Bible explained, the weightiest difficulties of all remain. The origin of evil, the mystery of Divine foreknowledge and free agency, and much of the scheme of redemption will still exercise our faith. We shall say even then, as it is our wisdom to say now, O the depths of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God! how unsearchable are His judgments, and His ways past finding out!” (Romans 11:33). Thus wrote Warburton.
We have come to the end, and in doing so, let me emphasize again the word with which we started: the Christian does not rely on evidence such as this: he has within him inward testimony to the inspiration of the Bible, which is the natural consequence of faith, and nothing that man or devil can say can shake him in his firm belief. We believe God, and He has spoken to us—shall we disbelieve Him for the reasonings of man? Are we Christians surprised at the attacks on men on the scriptures? No, for Paul foretold it. “This know also that in the last days perilous times shall come. For men shall be... lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God: having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.... Ever learning, but never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith.... Evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving and being deceived” (2 Timothy 3:1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 8, 13). What in such case is the resource of the faithful? “But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them: and that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All scripture is given by inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:14-16). Therefore, the resource in the last and evil days is reverence for the holy scriptures, and confidence in their divine inspiration.
What is the Christian to do? Am I to believe or throw up the authority of Christ and His apostles? What is the authority of Christianity if I do? Am I the disciple of impostors or deceived men, or of the blessed Son of God? and am I receiving divine truth from His inspired servants?
L. H. H.