THE WITNESS OF CHRIST TO THE INSPIRATION OF THE OLD TESTAMENT
Our first task must be, as we have stated above, to ascertain the teaching of the Son of God with regard to the Old Testament scriptures.
But let me first lay down this principle of faith, to which all true Christians will adhere with the utmost tenacity: that is, that Christ did not “succumb to popular opinion” in any question whatever. Our higher critic tells us that Moses did not write the Pentateuch: and to explain the fact that Christ speaks of Moses as the writer of those books, he makes the shameful suggestion that Christ allowed popular opinion to have its way with Him (though some would even go so far as to say, blasphemously, that He knew no better). Put bluntly, our higher critic states that Christ, not only once, but throughout His life, deliberately made false statements about the authorship of the Pentateuch. Such a suggestion needs no refutation to those who know anything of the character of Christ, as revealed in Scripture itself. Was He afraid of the popular opinion about the scribes and Pharisees? Did He not with all boldness pronounce most bitterly against them? Why, then, should He “succumb to popular opinion” on the question of authorship of the Pentateuch? And, finally, not only why should He, but could He?
Now we can divide the Lord's testimony to Old Testament into four groups, or classes.
THE WRITERS NAMED
(1) He mentions several of the writers by name, and ascribes to them in this capacity an authority which could only be conceded to one inspired. To the cleansed leper he says: “offer the gift that Moses commanded” (Matthew 8:4); and again, when asked about divorce, He says, “What did Moses command you?” (Mark 10:3); putting Moses into the place of authority, He speaks of Moses' seat in the tabernacle: “the Pharisees sit in Moses' seat” (Matthew 23:2). He speaks of Moses giving them the law: “Did not Moses give you the law?” (John 19). When quoting this book, He expressly speaks of Isaiah the prophet: “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Esaias the prophet.” (Matthew 8:17). He also speaks of his prophesying, “Well did Esaias prophesy of you, saying” (Matthew 15:7); and of his prophecy, “In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias” (Matthew 13:14). The Lord recognizes David as an inspired prophet: “How then doth David in spirit call him Lord?” (Matthew 22:43), and repeatedly quotes the Psalms as prophetic”...which was spoken by the prophet, saying, I will open my mouth in parables” (Matthew 13:35; Psalm 78:2) and “Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone that the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner (Matthew 21:42; Psalm 118:22)? He refers to Daniel and Jonah as prophets: “desolation spoken of by Daniel the prophet” (Matthew 24:15) and “the sign of the prophet Jonah (Matthew 16:4). He speaks of the writing of Zechariah as authoritative: “All ye shall be offended because of me this night; for it is written, I will smite the shepherd” (Matthew 26:31; Zechariah 13:7). What then? Those whom the Son of God counts as authorities, shall we despise them? Shall we call the story of Jonah a myth, and the prophecy of Daniel the writing of an impostor? Shall we affirm that Moses was not the writer of the Pentateuch when the Lord asserts that he was?
THE SCRIPTURES WERE TO BE READ
(2) He refers to Old Testament Scriptures with the question. “Have ye not read?” — “Have ye not read that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female” (Matthew 19:4)? and “Have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying: I am the God of Abraham...” (Matthew 22:31)? Christ thus intimated that if they had studied these scriptures, they would have ascertained the will of God on the subjects about which they had asked Him. If the Old Testament taught them on any subject, that was sufficient warrant for them to accept the teaching as that of God. Is it not also sufficient warrant for you?
THE STANDARD OF TRUTH
He refers to a definite collection of writings, knowledge of which protects against error in matters of religion. Thus He reproves the Sadducees for neglecting the Scriptures: “Ye do err, not knowing the Scriptures (τὰς γραφὰς), nor the power of God” (Matthew 22:29). Again, He commends the study of them as having the power of conveying eternal life. “Search the Scriptures, (ἐρευνᾶτε τὰς γραφὰς), for in them ye think ye have eternal life; and they are they which testify of me” ( John 5:39). Certain scholars would translate this: “Ye search the scriptures,” and whether this be correct or not does not alter the sense that the practice was commended; for our Lord proceeds to declare that the Scriptures testify of Him as the Messiah, and if so, who can avoid the conclusion that they are inspired? The very numerous passages in the Psalms and Prophets referring to the Messiah cannot have been written by man, who then knew nothing of Him, and conceived of Him as a mighty King rather than the lowly Jesus. On another occasion, when convincing them of the guilt incurred by rejecting Him, He asks: “Did ye never read in the Scriptures (ἐν τῶς γραφῶς), the stone which the builders rejected (Matthew 21:42; Psalm 118:22)?” implying that that passage was ample evidence of the folly of rejecting Him.
THE WORD OF GOD
Our Lord speaks of the Old Testament in the 'singular as the Scripture, ἡ γραφἠ— “He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said” (John 7:38), and “Hath not the scripture said, That Christ cometh of the seed of David?” (John 7:42), and “that the scripture might be fulfilled” (John 17:12). He vindicates its authority as the word of God: “Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods? If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, say ye of him, etc.” (John 10:34, 36). Here the Scripture is definitely called the word of God, and it is further stated that it cannot be broken (οὐ δύναται λυθῆναι,). Its authority cannot be called in question; it must be received and treated as coming from God.
From these and other passages which might be given, it is evident that our Lord fully admitted the inspired authority of the Old Testament. Inspiration is not taught in so many words—that would not be characteristic of His teaching, but it is implied clearly in many of His discourses. In many cases His appeals rest upon the Old Testament writings, and without them would lose all their force. In defense: the opponents of inspiration are compelled to adopt the abominable hypothesis of accommodation, spoken of previously as inconsistent with the integrity and derogatory to the dignity of our Redeemer.
ITS USE AGAINST SATAN
Not only did our Lord use the Old Testament to refute His earthly adversaries, but we find that He quoted scripture, and effectively too, when tempted of Satan. “The devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God, command this stone that it be made bread. And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written” (Luke 4:3. 4.), and again, “If thou therefore wilt worship me, all shall be thine. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind me, Satan: for it is written” (Luke 4:7, 8), and thirdly, “Jesus answering said unto him, It is said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God” (Luke 4:12). The devil was unable to resist the word of God: if that which the Lord quoted were only the word of man, how would that have troubled Satan? Is he not greater than man? But, you will say, Satan himself quoted scripture. Yes, but he misquoted it. He quoted inappositely. Satan's quotation was a right one, that is, had the Lord cast Himself down, no harm would have befallen Him, but the quotation did not advise anyone to seek danger. That Satan was able to quote scripture ineffectively is no proof that it is uninspired. Even higher critics quote scripture ineffectively, but it does not alter the character of the scripture in the slightest degree.
Now if the use of scripture correctly was a safe shield from the wiles of Satan, can it not be used by you as a safe and infallible guide? Can you not admit that it is indeed the word of God-
“sharper than any two-edged sword” (Hebrews 4:12)?
THE PROPHETIC SCRIPTURES
We will now consider the Lord's statements as to the truth of the prophets.
(1) The prophets spoke of Christ, and all that was written must be fulfilled. What could be more authoritative? Who could expect a clearer statement of the integrity of prophetic writings? “All things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me” (Luke 24:44).
“If ye believe not his [i.e. Moses'] writings, how shall ye believe my words” (John 5:47)? Here the Lord put the Old Testament scriptures on equal authority with His own words!
“The law and the prophets were until John and it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than for one tittle of the law to fall” (Luke 16:16, 17). Note that an unwritten law is no law: if there is a secret law unknown to the public, who is to blame the public for ignorance and transgression of such a law? The law is written in the Bible, and here we have an emphatic statement of the importance of and truth of the law.
“If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead” (Luke 16:31). Moses and the prophets spoke with equal authority with one who had seen all and returned from the dead to tell man. Is not this another way of stating that their writings are absolutely and literally true?
Well, then, we must accept Moses and the prophets as true, this being taught by the Lord in the strongest possible language, and since they are so infallibly true, can we believe them to be human writers only? can anything human be infallible? No, never. But since they are infallible, let us see what they say themselves.
“Hear ye, and give ear; be not proud: for the Lord hath spoken” (Jeremiah 13:15), says Jeremiah. He deliberately disdains his statements as his own, saying that they are the Lord's.
“Balaam took up his parable, and said... He hath said which heard the words of God” (Numbers 24:15, 16): similar statements are found in Numbers 23, such as “The Lord met Balaam and put a word in his mouth, and said, Go again unto Balak and say thus” (Numbers 23:16). Balaam then in both actions and speech claims the authority of God. If Balaam's ass never spoke, that chapter is a deliberate lie, and a lie recorded in the name of the Lord. You do not deny the sayings of the Lord recorded in these books, but you deny that Balaam's ass spoke, because physiologically it is impossible. If that chapter is a lie, what reason have we to believe the following chapters? If we do not believe these chapters, then we have no right to believe or anyhow to rest on the remainder of the book. All is by the same author, and one who is so daring a deceiver in one place will certainly not be infallible in other parts of his book. Take out Numbers from the Pentateuch, and the rest of the Pentateuch need not be believed: not only is the author the same, but the statements also to a large extent overlap.
What then? Our knowledge of the Law of God rests on a foundation in which innumerable holes can be picked—we need not believe all, some parts are certainly wrong, and others—well, possibly they are all right. How utterly absurd a conclusion we have come to by logical steps! I know that few will go as far as this, but logically, if the first step is taken, the others must follow. And, remember, all these results are because one cannot believe that Balaam's ass spoke! How futile!
But to return. Isaiah, Jeremiah, and other writers use repeatedly the expression “thus saith the Lord,” “the word of the Lord concerning"; “the word of the Lord came unto me, saying,” and similar phrases. Do you want examples? Jeremiah uses the expression, “saith the Lord” no less than 173 times, and Ezekiel, 2o6 times. So one might run through all the prophets (and the historical books too), and find almost everything based on the declarations of the Lord, and surely even the most searching of critics—apart from open infidels—will accept His statements as in-fallible.
THE CHARACTER OF PROPHECY
Now, not only do the prophets state themselves to be inspired of God, but the very character of their prophecy shows it. They predict a time which has not come even yet, besides many things that have been fulfilled in the Messiah. Whence then, did they obtain this prophecy unless by inspiration?
The early prophecies declare that the order of the inhabited world was all arranged in respect of Israel: “When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel” (Deuteronomy 32:8). Isaiah shows that Israel should be given up for a long period, yet preserved in a remnant: “Make the heart of this people fat, and make their ears heavy, and shut their eyes; lest they see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and convert and be healed. Then, said I, Lord, how long? And he answered, Until the cities be wasted without inhabitant, and the houses without man, and the land be utterly desolate. And the Lord have removed men far away, and there be a great forsaking in the midst of the land. But yet in it shall be a tenth, and it shall return (Isaiah 6:10-13).”
Isaiah also shows that the cause of their being laid aside is their rejection of Him, and promises fullest restoration. This is found in Isaiah (chapter 1.), of which only a small part can be given: “Which of my creditors is it to whom I have sold you? Behold, for your iniquities have ye sold yourselves.... Wherefore, when I came, was there no man? when I called, was there none to answer” (vers. 1, 2). Hosea declares that they shall remain many days desolate, without true God or false, but shall seek Jehovah in the end: “For the children of Israel shall abide many days without a king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice, and without an image, and without an ephod, and without teraphim. Afterward shall the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and David their king” (Hosea 3:4, 5). Micah declares that they will insult the Judge of Israel, born in Bethlehem, and therefore be given up: “they shall smite the Judge of Israel with a rod upon the cheek... therefore will he give them up” (Micah 5:1-3).
All this has been given to show that there is a great plan in God's mind respecting Israel settled beforehand, and revealed, in part at least, to the prophets. Can the student state seriously, then, that these writings are merely human? All the statements have been verified by the state of the Jews consequent on Christ's coming to them beforehand all was inexplicable; now we can understand it better from the explanations given in the New Testament.
The Old Testament speaks of the coming of the Messiah and then judgment. But the blessings promised under the Messiah did not have their fulfillment at His coming as they rejected Him: they will be fulfilled at a later day at the introduction of the millennium, which is to be preceded by judgment. The New, in quoting the Old, quotes only that part relating to the day of grace, and stops short of the judgment. For example, in Matthew 21:5, the quotation: “Tell ye the daughter of Sion, Behold, thy King cometh unto thee, meek and sitting on an ass, and a colt, the foal of an ass,” leaves out references to judgment, and also the famous passage in Luke 4:19, where our Lord does not quote “And the day of vengeance of our God” (Isaiah 61:2).
Now look for a moment at Daniel's prophecy of the “seventy weeks.” At the end of the sixty-ninth week, we are told that Messiah is cut off, and takes nothing. Then we are told of war and desolation. “And after the threescore and two weeks, shall Messiah be cut off, and shall have nothing (marg.)... and until the end of the war desolations are determined” (Dan. 9:26). That is, the prophet speaks of a break at the end of the sixty-ninth week, when Messiah is cut off. At the end of the seventieth week (not yet come) God brings in righteousness and blessing. There is much more to learn from this marvelous prophecy, but I have said enough to show its character.
My assertion is that the prophets do speak of future blessing for the Jews, of their being laid aside by God for their rejection of the Messiah, together with an appearing of grace, teaching us to wait for the appearing of the glory later, and as the prophecies are distinct, inspiration is the only explanation of them. At the same time I am aware that the prophecies were occasioned by the circumstances of the moment, and contain warnings and consolations to that generation, but they also looked out further in their true scope. This is an example of the double meaning before spoken of which is characteristic of the Divine word. The clear existence of true prophecy is one of the strongest proofs of inspiration.
We may at this stage note that unless the prophets were inspired, they were simple impostors, for they give their burdens as the words of God. We have also seen that the Lord did not treat them as impostors, but as true prophets of God, which leads us to the irresistible conclusion that the prophets were inspired.
(To be continued)
[L. H. H.]