The question which I would here consider, is not that of the amount of inspiration. I do not enter on the discussion of verbal inspiration-interesting as it is to those who believe in a revelation from God.
My object is the truth of inspiration itself, the reality of a written revelation, and indeed of all revelation given through the mouth of man.
It is not open infidelity as to the facts and doctrines of Christianity, which we have to combat. Our subject is the Divine authority of the books which relate these facts and treat of these doctrines. The existence of these truths is admitted, but their immediate communication to us by God, is denied with the exception possibly of the inward revelation of the person of Christ to the soul; if indeed that could be true consistently with these principles. It is the existence of the Word of God, having authority as His word, which is in question. It is owned perhaps: that Christ bore the title of the Word of God. But according to their system, they have no real authority for this-it may have been a mistake of John's, or a rabbinical or rabbino-Platonic tradition; And in fact the expression is found in writings of this description. It is important to keep the question clearly on this ground. The denial of any communication of Divine truth which, coming from God, would have the authority of God as truth. For us, if there is no inspiration, there is no divine truth: because a truth which is not communicated with divine certainty, is not a divine truth to man. Or, to speak more accurately, an existing fact, which cannot be naturally known to man, because not belonging to this creation; cannot be a truth to my soul if it be not communicated with divine certainty. There might be an immediate revelation to each individual in each case; otherwise, in order to believe, there must be an inspired communication either written or by word of mouth. I am not speaking of truth being applied to the conscience by the Holy Ghost, but of the means of possessing a divine certainty of truth, by knowing from whom we have received it. A doctrine cannot have more authority, as a truth, than the means by which it is communicated. A man without being inspired may be the channel through which truth is imparted, and the truth may act through the Spirit's power, on the heart and conscience; but this does not constitute a divine basis for faith in him who hears. The effect has been produced in the soul by God; the man may say " I believe this;" but if I ask him, " Why do you believe it?" he has no answer. He can give no account of his faith.
Let us remember, then, that when authority is spoken of, and it is said there is no authority, the words Divine certainty may be substituted for authority; and that the doctrine inculcated is, that there is no Divine certainty in the things of faith; that is to say, that there is no such thing as faith at all. John the Baptist describes faith in these words, " He that has received His testimony hath set to his seal that God is true. For He whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God." But this no longer exists in the system which denies inspiration. There is no longer such a thing as faith. The testimony of God is excluded. This may be called an It priori argument. But no, I only place the doc- trine in its true light; which is often enough to convince a sincere person. If any one disputed the interpretation of a text, and I could show that his mode of looking at it, the effect of his reasoning upon it, was to make Christ wicked, or to prove that He was not the Son of God; to state the real question, would be, in fact, to decide it, in the mind of one who knew Christ.
Besides, there are two kinds of a priori arguments, which it is important to point out here; they differ totally from each other and are morally quite opposed to each other. Suppose that some one tried to prove God a liar. I answer that cannot be! I condemn your reasoning as false, a priori. My judgment is sound, perfectly logical and philosophical (if you like to take that ground); because it is much more sure, nay, it is infallibly sure, that God cannot lie; whilst it is very possible, that your reasoning is false, even though I were unable to detect the fallacy. How many things there are as to which man wants the capacity for reasoning rightly! And this is the safeguard which God has given to the simpleminded, namely, a divine conviction with respect to those things which are beyond their reach-beyond the reach of man; while the philosopher who undertakes to explain them sinks in the mire. It is also what is called a priori reasoning, to say "God ought not to be so and so," but of an entirely different kind. In the first case, I-measure the folly of man by the certainty of what God is; in the second, I measure what God ought to be, taking man for my measure; which is necessarily false. "Thou thoughtest," said God, "that I was altogether such a one as thyself; but I will reprove thee, and set before thee the things which thou halt done." In the first case, I say God is true, therefore your argument which denies it must be false! In the second, I say, this is my thought, and God must be according to my thought. To measure man by the certainty of what God is, and to measure God by man are two very different things. This may be termed a priori reasoning. It is true, that it presumes there is the knowledge of God; and all men have not the knowledge of God. " He hides these things from the wise and prudent, and reveals them unto babes."
It is evident, that whatever may be the competency of witnesses, from their own faithfulness, and from the ever interesting and important fact of their proximity to the circumstances they relate, and to the living source of Christian doctrine, yet to deny direct inspiration, and to put in its stead the competency of witnesses; is to substitute a merely human belief for a divine testimony. The aim of such a system is to shut out God.
But I pursue my subject. It is asserted (for without this it would be open infidelity) that Revelation is allowed, although not, inspiration. That is to say, that the Apostles, or others, employed to communicate truth, had a Divine basis for their faith; but that other believers have not. For that is plainly the effect of this supposition. Truth has been revealed from heaven, that is, divinely communicated, to the Apostles and others; but since then there has been only a human testimony-however godly it may be, only human-no Divine basis, as to testimony, which, on God's part, could shield the church from error. I say on God's part, because no one disputes the possibility of man's falling into error through his own folly or negligence. The mere statement of this doctrine is almost its refutation; but it is needless to dwell further upon it, since it is formally contradicted in the word itself. "But God," says the Apostle, who carefully states the opposite of the notion which we combat, "God has revealed them unto us by his Spirit" (I suppose no one would venture to assert that the communications made through Paul. were of a different character, or of another nature than those given through Peter or John or any other prophet). The reason the Apostle gives for this revelation is very striking! "For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God. Now we have received not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God, that we might know the things that are given to us of God." I was going to dwell upon this argument forgetting that the Apostle had used it; I will now only insist on the force of what he says: " Without a divine communication there can be no faith." That which belongs to man, which is within the limits of his intelligence, may be known to man through sight, through reasoning, or through the testimony of man; but it is not so in the things of faith, in Divine thoughts and truths. God alone knows them, and God alone can make them known; consequently, man must be entirely ignorant of them, unless God reveal them. But He makes them known by His Spirit, that is, by Revelation giving the Holy Ghost Himself, who reveals it in the heart. I speak of the Apostolic work. The question then stands within very narrow limits. It is this: The Apostles. having received the knowledge of these things in a divine manner, did they communicate them to us in a manner, excellent indeed, but not inspired? God had revealed them to the Apostles by His Spirit; how did they communicate them? Was their inspiration what is termed " simply religious inspiration?" was it only that operation of the Spirit which is found in a spiritual preacher, and which leaves him still liable to error. Nothing can be more precise than the testimony of the Apostle on this point. Continuing the passage already quoted, he says, "which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth." Could the idea of inspiration be embodied in a form of words more absolutely definite than the expression, "words-which the Holy Ghost teacheth?" Here then there is nothing equivocal. When the Apostle set forth the truths which the Holy Ghost had taught him, he used words which the Holy Ghost had also taught him; that is, it was God Himself speaking through the mouth of man. And remark here, that inspiration is asserted in cases where religious inspiration was impossible, as in that of Balaam, when " He took up his parable and spoke, having heard the words of God." Finally, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and so many others who have said to us, "Thus saith the Lord," "The word of the Lord came unto me, saying," etc., are all examples of positive, and properly-so-called inspiration. Nevertheless, the arguments which deny inspiration must be applied universally. Here, however, there is nothing doubtful. The prophets boldly proclaim their inspiration, and we have it in a written form. In examining this subject, one cannot honestly leave out the Old Testament, because the arguments (except, perhaps, that which relates to the Canon) apply to both; to the Old as to the New. Has the Old Testament authority, and has the New none? Is the Old Testament the Word of God, and not the New? It is very convenient to reason upon a subject and leave out that part of which the proofs are incontestable. Inspiration is a reality, and we possess the absolute authority of God's own Word. The Prophets have affirmed it, the Lord has recognized it, i.e. that of this body of writings as it stands; and He has declared that nothing can invalidate its authority. The Apostle also has declared that these Scriptures were given by inspiration of God, and are capable of making us wise unto salvation. The principle of authority is true, the principle of inspiration is true., The question is limited to this; Is the New Testament inspired, also? The Old Testament leaves no room for any argument which would make inspiration questionable. It affirms its own inspiration in all the prophetic part; and the words of the Lord and of the Apostles prove that of all the books it contains. This should be thoroughly understood. Inspiration is certain, the divine authority of the Word of God incontestable. This question alone remains. Is the New Testament a part of that Word? Principles which deny that which the Lord and the Apostles affirm, inspire no confidence in the judgment of any one who can entertain such false and even blasphemous principles. He who denies inspiration, denies that which the Lord and the Apostles maintain-for they maintain the inspiration of the Old Testament. He has, therefore, already destroyed all my confidence in his judgment; and I cannot listen to him when he tells me that the New Testament has not the authority of inspiration.
I will not multiply quotations to prove that the prophets assert the inspiration of their prophecies; because it recurs at the beginning of almost every separate prophecy; but I will point out the passages in the New Testament, which recognize the Scriptures of the Old as having this authority. Luke 24:4444And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that 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), "All things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the Prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me." Jesus here recognizes the body of writings, called the Old Testament in its three parts-still thus entitled in the modern Hebrew Bibles. The Lord gives them equal authority, ver. 27, "And beginning at Moses, and all the prophets, He expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself." John 5:3939Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me. (John 5:39)," Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they which testify of me." "And the Scripture cannot be broken" (John 10:3535If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken; (John 10:35)). These passages demonstrate that the Scriptures of the Old Testament were a body of writings recognized by the Lord, and that, in the detail of its present divisions, recognized as having, absolute authority. But, to have their writings is something more, as to the form of communication, than having the truth spoken by word of mouth; even though it were by the mouth of the Lord Himself. John 5:4747But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words? (John 5:47), " If ye believe not his writings., how shall ye believe my words?" The writings, then, were the object of faith, and consequently had the authority of the Word of God. " They have Moses and the Prophets, let them hear them"-" lf they 'hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead" (Luke 16:29,3129Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. (Luke 16:29)
31And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. (Luke 16:31)). When the Apostle preached the truth at Berea, the Jews-his hearers-" searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so," that is to say, they made use of the Scriptures, as an authority, to judge the teaching even of an Apostle; and they are commended for so doing (Acts 17:1111These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so. (Acts 17:11)). The inspiration of the Old Testament is then demonstrated, its authority recognized by the Lord, and the whole-as we possess it-declared to be authentic, and to be clothed with an authority which nothing can invalidate.
The Scriptures, as a whole, are owned of God, as a distinct class of writings, having a certain authority; namely, that of HIS WORD. As it is written in Prov. 30:5, 65Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him. 6Add thou not unto his words, lest he reprove thee, and thou be found a liar. (Proverbs 30:5‑6)-" Every word of God is pure: He is a shield unto them that put their trust in Him. Add thou not to His words, lest He reprove thee, and thou be found a liar." Finally, the Apostle Paul (2 Tim. 3.16) gives a remarkable testimony to the same effect, and which clearly designates this class of writings; " All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works." We have only therefore to learn whether the New Testament forms a part of "the Scriptures," or whether the Church is entirely without a divine communication entrusted to herself; and possesses only the Old Testament. And here I would notice the folly of a principle set forth by some of those who deny inspiration. It is said, that the claim to inspiration is necessarily limited to the Book which makes the claim; or, at least, to the writings of the same author. There is no sense in this assertion. Why could not an inspired author, or the Lord, declare all the other Books, or some amongst them, to be inspired? And, on the other hand, there is no necessity that the other writings of an author should be inspired, because one of them is so. The Lord sets His seal to the entire Old Testament; and Paul declares that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God. Does this only prove the inspiration of the Epistle to Timothy in which the assertion is found? Those who seek to overthrow the foundations of truth by such arguments as these, deserve chiding rather than refutation. In 2 Peter 1:19-2119We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts: 20Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. (2 Peter 1:19‑21), we find, " the word of prophecy," " the prophecies of Scrip- lure," which holy men of God spade as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." There are persons who reject this Epistle; but I am not bound to own their authority. The style of the Epistle is not that of an impostor. Yet if not written by Peter, it is certainly the work of an impostor, for he calls himself the Apostle, and says it is his second Epistle. But I leave this. There is another point which must be noticed in this discussion. They maintain that we cannot avail ourselves of the New Testament, till the Canon is settled. Why not? Let us suppose (although I do not believe it of the Word) that a wilding is found in my garden, can I therefore maker no use of the good trees which are in it? Supposing the second Epistle of Peter were spurious, and that the Apocalypse deserved all that is said against it by certain authors, what has that to do with the Epistle of John, or that of Paul to the Romans. I might admit that one Epistle was questionable-which I do not admit-without, the least in the world, questioning the others.
I return to direct proofs. We have seen the inspiration, the authority, the Canon even, of the Old Testament fully proved; and the principles which deny inspiration itself, utterly overthrown. But we have seen more than this. Paul received "by revelation" the truths he taught, and he communicated them in "words which the Holy Ghost teacheth," that is to say, by inspiration; consequently, it is certain that the early disciples had the truth communicated to them by inspiration, as the foundation of their faith. And the argument which denies inspiration to the New Testament, if true, would only prove that God had changed His mode of acting, and left the succeeding ages without this foundation, and without Divine basis for their faith: a change incredible enough. But when Paul says, "which things we speak" does he mean those things which he spoke by word of mouth only? And has he taught nothing by writing? We well' know that he has taught by writing that which had been revealed to him; that is to say, that his writings for this purpose were inspired. He even says so, which would not have been necessary after the passage we have quoted from Corinthians. But God has favored us with this additional proof: "How," he says, " by revelation He made known unto me the mystery, as I wrote afore in few words, whereby when ye read ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ?" Should any say, "It may be so when fundamental truths are concerned, but not otherwise;" even this refuge is denied them by Scripture. In giving details for the inward regulation of a church (1 Cor. 14:36, 3736What? came the word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? 37If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. (1 Corinthians 14:36‑37)), the Apostle says, "Came the Word of God out from you? or came it unto you only? If any man think himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant." The communications then of the Spirit to the church or to the world, were the "Word of God," and that which was written by the Apostle to direct the Saints, was " the commandment of the Lord." " For this cause," said the Apostle to the Thessalonians (1 Thess. 2:1313For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because, when ye received the word of God which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe. (1 Thessalonians 2:13)), "we thank God without ceasing, because, when ye received the Word of God, which ye heard of us, ye received it not as the word of men, but as it is in truth, the Word of God, which effectually worketh also in you that believe." Thus we see that the Apostle puts his writings on the footing of commandments from the Lord, with the sorrowful consolation for those who cannot discern it, " If any man be ignorant, LET HIM BE IGNORANT." NOW will any one tell me, that the Apostle, acting in the self-same character and addressing himself in the same manner in virtue of his Apostolic sanction and authority, to the Romans or to the Galatians, is less inspired than when he addresses the Corinthians? Such an argument deserves no other refutation than "if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant!" To say God has willed that the faith of the Ephesians and Corinthians, should rest upon Divine inspiration, and that of the Romans and Galatians on a human basis, deserves no serious answer. We have a particular class of writings; and this class of writings is called "The Scriptures." The sixteenth chapter of Romans defines this principle very clearly in ver. 26. "But now is made manifest [i.e. the mystery] and by the prophetic writings [see Greek] according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith." This passage again points out that class of writings which we call the Scriptures. Writings which have the authority of a revelation, an oracle of God; they are " prophetic writings." In short, to sum up this part of the testimonies we possess, Peter in his second Epistle, recognizing these writings as the Scriptures, tells us, when speaking of Paul's Epistles, that those who are "unlearned and unstable, wrest them, as they do the other. Scriptures," proving that Paul's Epistles form a part of the Scriptures, a term very well understood and having the same meaning then as now; as the Lord's own words demonstrate. I know, indeed, as I have already said, that some reject this Epistle; but I do not accept their dictum as an authority.
The existence, then, of prophetic scriptures, of the scriptures of the New Testament, which have the authority of the Word of God, of the commandments of God, is most clearly proved. He who finds more authority in the words of the Lord's Apostle than in those of the adversaries of inspiration, he who reveres the Word of God and the revelations of God, will have no doubt on the subject. But, if there are the writings of John or Peter making the same claim, addressing Christians in the same manner; and that in perfect accordance with the divine ministry committed to them; as, for instance, those of Peter to the circumcision, could a Christian say, "The writings of one apostle are inspired, but those of another are not; although entirely of the same nature, and although he speaks expressly in the name of his apostolate and as exercising the authority of his mission? I assume now their authenticity; and that they are really the writings they claim to be. We need not look for the words "I am inspired." We find in them the unequivocal expression of authority. The faith of Christians consequently clothes them with this authority. They announce the truth, as having a right to impose their thoughts, as such, and in fact imposing them. Take the first Epistle of Peter. Does he not speak with full authority as apostle? And when Paul said, "If any obey not our word by this Epistle, note that man and have no company with him;" had not that written word apostolic authority? When John said, "We are of God: he that knoweth God, heareth us; he that is not of God, heareth not us" (1 John 4:66We are of God: he that knoweth God heareth us; he that is not of God heareth not us. Hereby know we the spirit of truth, and the spirit of error. (1 John 4:6)), exercising thus divine authority over the conscience, do you think he meant that these words pronounced so solemnly had not altogether the same authority? It would be a contradiction in itself, for if they rejected his words they did not hear him. One cannot attribute authority to his words spoken elsewhere, without attributing it to the words which claim that authority. If I say, "I command you to obey me," the command which I give, and the authority of that which I have already commanded, stand or fall together. I cannot believe the authority of Peter to be less great than that of John or of Paul. He was sent forth with the same authority by the Lord.
Well then what have we proved? That there is a class of writings called " the Scriptures" which are inspired, which possess absolute authority as the Word of God, recognized by the Lord and His apostles, and brought forward constantly by them with the greatest solemnity. We have found that a very large portion of the New Testament is spoken of as forming part of these Scriptures; that there is a body of writings attached to the apostolic work, prophetic scriptures used by the command of God, a body of writings which has the authority of the Word of God. The question then is narrowed into very small dimensions. The assertion that there is no inspiration no Divine authority for the word, has been proved entirely false. It is in flagrant opposition to the authority of the Lord and the apostles; and seeks to overthrow that which they maintain. The only question is this, does such or such a book form a part of this inspired collection? A very important question; but which, by the very fact of its being asked, presupposes the existence and the authority of the Word of God; and only seeks not to confound human pretensions with the divine authority it reveres; the full value of which it seeks to preserve untouched and without alloy.
It will be felt that this is not the place for detailed proofs of the authenticity of each book of the New Testament: it would be to write an introduction to the New Testament. I will point out farther on, some general principles of the ways of God in this respect. The great question is decided. It did not consist in inquiring whether such or such a book were genuine, admitting the inspiration of the rest; but in ascertaining whether there be such a thing as inspiration at all. Now, inspiration has been proved; not only revelation, but inspiration. The revealed truth communicated in words taught by the Holy Ghost. If this be so (mark it well) the system which denies it, bears the character not only of a false principle, but of a principle hostile to God and to His goodness, subversive of the truth He has condescended to make known to us, and of the very foundations of our faith. It is a very important thing to judge the source and the character of that which presents itself as truth. "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God; for many false prophets are gone out into the world [to act]." Following this injunction of the apostle's—of the Holy Ghost's-I solemnly judge that the principle in question proceeds from Satan. It were out of place here to examine how far the principles current in the religious world, have given occasion to this inroad of the enemy. Whatever saps the foundations of faith, in opposition to the express declarations of the Spirit of God, comes from the enemy; and I have always found that to deal with that which is of the enemy openly and publicly as from the enemy, is the wisdom of God and is accompanied by His strength and His blessing. I deal thus with the doctrine that denies the inspiration of scripture.
There is one kind of proof of the authority of Scripture, that is to say of a collection of writings having the authority of the Word of God, which is difficult to produce, on account of the very thing which constitutes its value. I mean; the constant appeal to the Written Word when addressing believers as to a recognized authority. It is used as an authority which no one, except a professed unbeliever, would think of disputing. Open the New Testament at almost what page you like, you will find a proof of this. " It is written, it is written," settled every question decided every controversy. It is not the Scriptures which have to be proved, they serve themselves for an absolute and final proof. This is the strongest testimony we can have. If I say-in canvassing some point of human conduct-the law says this, and the law says that, as settling the question; that takes for granted the existence of the law and its sovereign authority over all disputed points-an authority which no one can gainsay. Thus it is in the use of Scripture. If the word of the Apostles were the word of authority, like that of the Church (as has been said) and were not the word of God, which I entirely believe it to be, even this word of authority submits itself most absolutely to the authority of the Word. The Scriptures are searched to ascertain whether the teaching of an. Apostle were true. " These things were done that the Scripture might be fulfilled."-" Jesus, that the Scripture might be fulfilled, saith, I thirst."-" Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers."-"Promised afore by his prophets in the Holy Scriptures."
Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures, and was buried, and rose again the third day, according to the Scriptures."- "And the Scripture foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith."- "And the Scripture cannot be broken." "Give place unto wrath; for it is written."—"That by comfort of the Scriptures we might have hope."
It was the highest of all the Jewish privileges, that the "oracles of God" were committed to them. " For what saith the Scripture?"-"The Scriptures are able to make us wise unto salvation." The Jews made "the Word of God of none effect through their traditions."- " Then opened He their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures: and said unto them, Thus it is written." Is it in accommodating Himself to man, that the Lord opens the understanding that they may understand things which have not divine authority? No, the Scriptures are treated by the Apostles, by the Lord himself, as having an incontestable and divine authority as the Oracles of God, as The Word of God. This is so entirely true, that when-in fulfilling his divine mission-it behooved the Lord to undergo the temptation of the enemy, this was the weapon He used-as being divinely tempered-against which Satan had no power, and his devices no possible success. It sufficed to say, "It is written." The tempter would have betrayed himself if he had questioned the absolute authority of the quotation: his best resource was to quote Scripture his own way; but it does not fail under this trial. The second Adam still replies, " It is also written." One may, without blame, prefer the wisdom and the perfection of one's Savior, to the self-sufficiency and unbelief of human wisdom. And observe here, the importance of this use of the Word of God, the Holy Scriptures, the Oracles of God, by the Apostles and by the Lord. People say, " But there are various readings, bad translations, statements which the increase of knowledge has proved impossible, so that Scripture cannot be used as an authority." The Lord, then, was mistaken!
There were various readings, bad translations (especially that of the Septuagint), pointed out by those who deny Inspiration, and supposed inconsistencies, at the very time when the Lord said, " The Scriptures cannot be broken." When, in his controversy with Satan, he employed the Scriptures, Satan, lest he should appear to be Satan undisguised, durst not question their authority. These things existed too when the Apostle called them the Oracles of God. None of these things prevented the Lord's recognizing their absolute authority on every occasion. "The foolishness of God is wiser than men." As to proofs which may be given of the authority of The Word, it carries its own proof with it, as does every testimony from God. This is a fundamental principle. It does not require proof, it furnishes its own proofs of everything to the soul. We do not bring a light to the sun in order to discern it, it enlightens us. The Word of God is not judged, it judges. If God speaks, and we have seen that the Scriptures are called His Word, woe unto him that knows not it is God who speaks. There are those assuredly who will not own that it is He. If this refusal to believe be final, they are lost, sentence has already been passed upon them; the light is come, and the darkness comprehends it not. "The word of God is sharper than a two-edged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." It is received, whether spoken or written, as the Word of God; he who rejects it is lost. If any remain in ignorance of some of its details, if any are mistaken as to some book, they lose just so much of it through their pride. "The testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple moreover by them is thy servant warned."—"The entrance of thy word giveth light, it giveth understanding unto the simple." Read the whole 119th Psalm. This conviction that the Word is its own evidence, is all-important; this alone maintains the true character of the Word of God. Like Jesus, it "receives not testimony from man." He who believes not in the Son of God will be condemned. He that believeth not the record that God gave of his Son hath made God a liar, and hath not life. Now, according to the Lord's own words, the Scriptures testify of Him. The fundamental principle is this-The Word of God must be received by Faith; and the reasonings of man cannot be the foundation of faith; if they were, it would not be faith in God, nor faith in His word. "He believed God."- "They shall be all taught of God; every man, therefore, that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father cometh unto me."
Having established this principle, I would enter into some details respecting the ways of God in this matter. We have seen the Lord setting his seal to the Scriptures, but observe, in so doing, He has set his seal to the faith of all those who had previously believed in them. It was not because He had done so that those faithful ones believed. Their heart, their faith, had been previously tested. They had faith, because they had received the testimony of the Scriptures before they were thus sanctioned., at the time when they were presented to their faith, on the ground of their own authority. When Jeremiah spoke, it does not follow that all received his testimony; there were some who had not ears to hear, but who listened to false prophets. When God is to be owned it becomes a moral question: but in all ages, believers have received the testimony of God, and unbelievers have not been able to discern God in the testimony; it is so now. God gives, in His word, sufficient moral evidence to commend it to the conscience. When He has set up a new thing, or when He has sustained faith at a distance from the sanctuary, He has added a sufficiency of extraordinary evidences. But with this comes the moral responsibility of him who hears, which God never sets aside; and also the grace which acts in giving and in establishing faith: the reception of the Word, and afterward the understanding this Word, is a thing presented to the responsibility of man. Grace alone can enable him to receive and to understand it. Nothing can set aside this responsibility, or take away the necessity of this grace, or destroy its efficacy. The positive authority of the Apostolic testimony, claiming submission, as it does, in the most peremptory manner, cannot alter this. " If any man think himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord. But if any man be ignorant, let him be ignorant." An Apostle cannot go beyond that. For the things which are communicated in words taught by the Spirit, are spiritually discerned. It was thus in the days of all the prophets. " Hear ye and give ear," said Jeremiah, " be not proud: for the Lord hath spoken. But if ye will not hear it, my soul shall weep in secret places for your pride." Now, the condition which brings judgment upon the house of God is marked by this-the Word loses its authority, excepting over the remnant preserved by Him. " And the vision of all is become unto you as the words of a book that is sealed, which men deliver to one that is learned, saying, Read this, I pray thee: and he saith, I cannot, for it is sealed. And the book is delivered to him that is not learned; saying, Read this, I pray thee; and he saith I am not learned. Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honor me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men." This is the condition of the people and the cause of the judgment which falls upon them.
Then the Lord said "Bind up the testimony, seal the law among my disciples ... To the law and to the testimony." Thus also in the New Testament " In the last days perilous times shall come." What is then the resource? " 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." The resource in the last days, is reverence for the Holy Scriptures, and the assurance of their sufficiency. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God. Therefore whether amongst the Jews, whether in the Church, the resource in evil days is confidence in the Divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. The Lord has pointed it out, and sanctioned it, but this confidence in the authority of the Word existed before He had given it His sanction.
And it is this faith, without any other sanction than the. Word itself, which He has sanctioned. Precious testimony for after-days, since the same sanction applies to them also. The apostle, in warning us of perilous times, directs our thoughts beforehand to the same means of establishing the soul. Those who had faith in the Scriptures before the Savior's testimony, having been enabled, through grace, to discern what was God's word, before Jesus Lad sealed the whole, have thus been approved by Him. Those who do so afterward, have already this approval. They have the same responsibility as to what they receive; but although this responsibility exists, God does not fail to use means. There is another principle which should be noticed here. It is, that the oracles of God are committed to His people. The Church cannot impose her authority upon us; but she is responsible for preserving that which has been committed to her. Thus Rome has shown her unfaithfulness, by adding apocryphal books. Now, although the Church may, in detail, fail in her responsibility, it is impossible, in anything essential to it, that God should fail His Church, or that Christ should cease to nourish and cherish it. God watches over all this; not to keep the learned from stumbling, but that believers may have food from Him, and an unerring rule of life. It is not the babe and the wayfaring man who find difficulties; God has given them the Bible, and preserved it for them; and their conscience bears them witness in the Holy Ghost, that God works in them by this Word. The Holy Ghost enables them, according to the measure of their spirituality, to use and understand it. A heart, full of joy because taught of God, discerns the Word. It is read perhaps in a bad translation; and doubtless, something is lost thereby; but God has taken care that enough should remain to teach the heart with certainty His truth and His ways. This Word is the sword of the Spirit-it carries conviction with it, when the Spirit uses it in the power of His grace. It leaves man under the responsibility of having rejected it, whenever it has been presented to his conscience.
A man of little information, but taught of God, is much more able to apprehend the whole truth, even through the medium of an indifferent translation, than the learned man who thinks he can judge of the whole canon; and for this reason. The Church puts the New Testament into his hands, for the oracles of God are committed to the Church; this does not indeed impart faith, but it is the means which God uses. The Church presents us with them; not with authority as having power to judge the Word; but as the faithful guardian of that which had been committed to her. This is done through relations, friends, ministers; and there is a general belief in the professing Church that it is the word of God. The simple-minded do not set themselves to judge the whole canon of the New Testament before reading it; they read it, and the Word produces faith.
A man receives, by the teaching of God, first one truth and then another. To such a one, the history of Jesus is all divine; it communicates to his soul what he receives with divine knowledge, for these things are spiritually discerned. The word has judged him, the Word has revealed Jesus to him. The epistles unfold divine truth-he enjoys the word with a divine certainty that God has spoken to him. He makes use of every book in the New Testament, without knowing what the term "Canon" means. And if some great scholar would deprive him of his treasure; to wit, the authority and inspiration of that word which he knows to be of God; this Word is the sword of the Spirit in his hands, to teach him the folly of human wisdom. He pities the learned man who is without all that, of which he has the divine fruition.
He who has eaten bread knows what bread is, although -he may not understand the art of baking. If, through grace, the believer grows in divine knowledge, he sees the harmony of the whole, the adaptation of the several parts. He has not only the full assurance of faith, but the full assurance of understanding also. He perceives the divine wisdom of the Bible, and not merely the divine truth in it. He finds perhaps a text spoiled by a bad translation-it does not harmonize with what he knows to be the truth of God; he will say, "I don't understand that passage" (I am supposing him deprived of all spiritual help, which is not the case, according to the ways of God in His Church). Humble in heart, he will attribute it to his own ignorance. The wisdom of this world reasons about the canon, and will form its judgment before it reads, and it receives nothing. The mind of man cannot create for itself the things of God. Human reason cannot pronounce upon the authority of the word of God.. It may be said, this is trusting to a feeling; but no, it is trusting to God. "They shall be all taught of God." The authority of the Word can only be known by believing in it.
He who has only man's thoughts will say, " But I must know that it is the word of God before I can believe in it." I reply, "You cannot." It is true, happily true, that we receive the New Testament as the Word of God, on the faith of our parents or of our education; but it is never really received as such, till it is " mixed with faith " in those that read it. For my part, I receive the New Testament with full assurance, in its present form, as adopted by the universal Church. Circumstances having called me to it, I have examined the external evidences, and found them satisfactory; but that does not produce faith. It may be useful, to obviate the objections made by those who do not live upon the Word, and cannot judge of it. The authority of God is not subject to human intelligence. I know that some of the epistles were questioned in the early ages, at least in certain places; but I doubt not, that in receiving those books which form the New Testament, as inspired, the Church was guided by God. The means of communication are not the rule of authority; but these means may be used according to the certainty of the rule. A mother instructs her child in the truth, but she is not the rule of the truth. Thus the poor Christian receives the New Testament in the form in which it is distributed. It may be that he cannot demonstrate its authenticity, but he happily profits by the fact that the Church receives it. When he has read it, he finds it divine. God thus uses means to spread the truth, and the book which contains it. The multitude of believers profit by it. It is God who acts thus.
If an answer must be given to unbelievers who dispute the authority of that which others enjoy, it may be that only a few amongst them are able to convince gainsayers; but that does not hinder God's using these means, and giving faith to those who use them; and then the 'folly of gainsayers and of those who have fed themselves upon unbelief, becomes manifest.
I have said that the man who is exercised in the word according to God, finds not only the proof of its divinity in the application of passage after passage to his conscience, but will gain the deepest conviction of its perfection as a whole, through the knowledge he will thus gain of the fullness of Christ. I will take an instance, which is used to prove that there are things in the New Testament which are outside the province of spiritual discernment. The Spirit of God cannot, it is said, make us feel the value of a genealogy. Such a remark only betrays ignorance of the Word and of Christ Himself: To set forth the varied glory of Jesus, according to the counsels of God respecting Him, it is needful to present the different characters He bears; this is the substance of God's revelation. Now His connection with Abraham and David, and His connection with Adam, are leading points in this revelation; and the genealogies set this before us. But this is not all. They correspond exactly with the character of the Gospels in which we find them. The Gospel by Matthew treats especially of the Messiah, of the relation of Christ to the Jews, of the fulfillment of prophecy in Him, and at the same time, of His rejection as Messiah, and the transition to a new dispensation. Luke sets before us, after the Savior's birth, the great features of grace brought in by the second Adam, and the great moral principles belonging to it; so that in the body of this Gospel, events are not arranged in chronological order, but according to their moral bearing. This is true, even in the history of the temptation. John, on the contrary, gives us the person of the Savior, who is above all the dispensational dealings of God in the earth. The Jews are set aside throughout as rejected, therefore no genealogy is given. The Word was God. John's gospel begins before Genesis, and at the close, we find neither the agony in Gethsemane, nor the forsaking on the cross; but other things are mentioned which are not found in Matthew or in Luke. Thus the different glories of Christ are manifested, and by degrees the admirable perfection of the Word shines forth in all its splendor. The criticisms of man fade away, like the stars before the sun, which makes them disappear, with the darkness that allowed them to be seen. The Bible presents us with a perfection both in its details and as a whole, which leaves no doubt in the mind of one who has tasted it, that as a complete whole it is divine.
I have already spoken of its divinity in its separate parts, as the sword of the Spirit causing its power to be felt in the soul, judging it, and revealing Christ to it; but I speak of it now as a whole, of what is called the canon of Scripture. If Matthew were wanting, we should not have the Messiah, Son of David, and Son of Abraham. If Mark were wanting, we should not have the Servant, made in the likeness of man; if Luke, we should not have the Son of Man; if John, we should lose the Son of God. In the Acts, we find the foundation of the Church, by the power of the Spirit of God, the commencement and development of the Church in Jerusalem, through the instrumentality of the twelve; then the Gentiles grafted into the good Olive Tree by Peter, the Apostle of the circumcision; and, when Jerusalem had rejected the testimony, the Church, fully revealed, and called by the ministry of Paul, the apostle of the Gentiles. The Epistle to the Romans furnishes the eternal principles of God's relationship with man, established in blessing by means of Christ, dead and risen, and the reconciling of these things with the specialty of the promises made to the Jews by Him whose gifts and calling are without repentance. In the Corinthians are found details respecting the inward regulation of a Church; its walk, its order, its restoration when it had gone astray, the patience and the energy of grace; the whole sketched by the Spirit of God, acting through an apostle, and declaring the divine authority of His commands. In Galatians, the contrast between Law and Promise as well as the source of ministry; in a word the condemnation of Judaism, even in its very roots.
In Ephesians, the fullness of the Church's privileges, as the body of Christ, her connection with Him, and " the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations," in which all the counsels of God, for His glory, are unfolded. In Colossians, the fullness which is in the head for the body, and the solemn warning not to separate practically from this standing of union with the Head, through allowing a show of humility to glide into the bosom of the Church. In Philippians, the Apostle's experience of what Christ is to the Christian; as sufficient for all things, whatever his position may be. His immediate sufficiency, even when the Christian should be deprived of apostolic support; and the walk of the Church in the unity of grace, in unity maintained by grace, when the spiritual energy of her human leaders should be wanting. It is a precious epistle in this point of view. In Thessalonians the hope of the Church in the freshness of her affections; and the mystery of iniquity ending in the manifestation of the man of sin; a mystery notwithstanding which, the Church is called to maintain this hope and her affections. In Timothy and Titus, what may be termed ecclesiastical care for the maintenance whether of truth or of order. In the Epistle to the Ephesians, the Church had been seen seated as a body in the heavenly places. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, the faithful are viewed as journeying in weakness upon the earth, and Christ is consequently seen apart, for them, in heaven, in contrast with the earthly figures of it given to Israel. This gives rise to a glorious unfolding of the person of our Lord, as God the Creator, as man, and as the Son over His own house, the Creator of all things, and lastly, very fully as High Priest; after the order of Melchisedec, as to his personal rights; after the likeness of Aaron, or rather in contrast with Aaron, as to the present exercise of priesthood. This leads to the unfolding of the life of faith, the faith common to all saints; and to the final separation of the believing Jews from the camp of earthly religion, as having " come to the heavenly Jerusalem." James sets before us that girdle of practical righteousness, which restrains the natural tendency of the heart to abuse grace; and the last dealings of God with the twelve tribes (as in Jonah with the Gentiles) when the light and perfection of a new order of things eclipsed that old order to which those tribes had proved unfaithful. In Peter, we find the Christian a pilgrim on the earth, placed in this position by the power of Christ's resurrection, according to an election which is not that of an earthly people, but unto eternal life.
This was addressed to the Jews of the Dispersion (Peter was the apostle of the Circumcision), and was particularly adapted to them, setting them free from the idea of an earthly establishment, to be pilgrims, through grace, on the earth, in view of an incorruptible inheritance. THE SECOND EPISTLE OF PETER is written in the prospect of his departure, and of the flowing in of evil. It exhorts them to press forward. On the one hand, it gives the picture and the assurance of the glory of the coming kingdom, in its heavenly aspect but manifested on the earth; on the other hand, the corruption which would degrade and swallow up Christianity; and the consequences of this in judgment. Peter never represents the Church as one body in heaven, as Paul does; he views her, or rather her members, as on the earth; and they are pilgrims there. The exact correspondence of every detail with this point of view, even in the manner of presenting the glory (2 Peter 1), manifests a perfection which proves its divine origin. Jude admirably unfolds all the features of the apostasy; its beginning and its results; recording that which we should otherwise have lost, the solemn prophecy of Enoch; proving how clear was the testimony of God before the flood-God, who is unchangeable in purpose from the beginning to the end. John presents us with all the features of the Divine nature; first of all as manifested in Jesus; and then as characteristic of the whole family; a safeguard against every pretension, which, not having these features, would seek to pervert the faithful; and the means of strengthening and establishing the faithful by the development of these qualities of the nature of God, with whom, if light be in them, they have communion; and in whom, if love be in them, they dwell, and He in them. This is true of every believer in Jesus.
This love was manifested in Christ's coming down into the earth; and was perfected, by setting us, in full enjoyment with Him, in His own place above. Philemon, and the two lesser Epistles of John, show us that if the mystery of God is revealed to us by one Apostle, and the nature of God set evidently before us by another; if they lift us up to the height of His counsels and of His being, they can-and the Christianity they preach can-be occupied with the interests of a runaway slave and his master, and with the anxieties and practical difficulties of an excellent lady, and a kind and worthy brother, as to receiving persons to whom Christian love might open the door, but who brought not the doctrine of Christ. They show us, that that love which dwells in God, which is the very nature of God, which is manifested in the glorious work of Christ, that wisdom, which ordains all mysteries for His eternal glory, disdains not to provide, with perfect delicacy, for the difficult relationships between a master and his slave; nor to manifest the tenderest solicitude with respect to the details of life. This love, in the perfection of wisdom and grace, links the fullness and the perfection of God with every emotion of the human heart, with every circumstance of our life in this world; and sanctifies a people who are to dwell with God by the revelation of what he is, and fits them for His presence by creating pure affections, and by making a holy love the spring of their whole life.
In the Apocalypse, the Spirit of God, after having given, in an admirable review of the state of seven Asiatic churches, the elements of a perfect judgment with respect to every state in which one connected with the Church could be found; after having at the same time encouraged the faithfulness of those who had ears to hear, by promises of blessing from above, specially suited to the difficulties of these several conditions; after having declared that these blessings are prepared for " him that overcometh" in the conflict, which the declension of the Church brings him into (a declension which had already commenced in the days of the Apostle, in their leaving their first love, and which will end in compelling Christ to spew out of His mouth those who bear His name); after having thus furnished the Christian with all that he needs in the midst of the difficulties presented by the state of the professing Church; and having revealed the judgment of Christ with a perfection, and a circumstantial adaptation which are most admirable, the Holy Ghost then lifts the veil, to show where all this will end in the judgment of the world. He reveals, first of all, chastenings in outward things; then more directly upon man himself; afterward, all the features of man's dreadful apostasy, the diabolical organization of his forces against Christ; and, at length, the judgment which will break forth at the coming of Christ himself, the King of kings and Lord of lords. This judgment making way for an administration of blessing and happiness (Satan being bound), which will only be interrupted by his being loosed from his prison, to try those who have enjoyed this happiness, and thus to bring on the final judgment of the dead, and the eternal state in which God will be all in all. This is the methodical and complete development of that which Jude, 2 Peter, and 2 Thessalonians had made known to the Church in its moral elements.
At the close of the book the connection of the Church in Heaven with Christ, and with the times of blessing enjoyed under the reign of Christ, are more particularly unfolded.
There is another striking feature of the perfection of the Apocalypse, which may be added here; that is, its moral unity. The standing of the Church is indeed defined in the opening and concluding paragraphs, by the expression of her own sentiments; but there is never throughout the book, one thought connected with the living communication of grace from the Head to the members. It is a prophetic book of judgment, first of all that of the Church, seen in its responsibility upon the earth. In the chapters which speak of the Church, there is promise, threatening, warning, judgment of its condition, revelation of the characters of the Son of Man, everything connected with responsibility. The Head, the source of life and knowledge to the body, is not mentioned in these chapters. After the judgment of the Church comes that of the world; a judgment increasing in severity, up to the destruction of the Wicked One. In this part of the book is found all that the faithful need, in order to understand the ways of God, and to discern the path He has marked out for them in these perilous times; but never Christ the living source of grace: everything is in its right place, for it is the work of God.
The New Testament presents us then, from the manifestation of the Man Christ in humiliation on the earth, up to the eternal state when God will be all in all, with the full development of all the ways of God, and of what He is in Himself, in order that man may joy in Him, know Him and glorify Him: that the believer may be kept through all the difficulties and dangers of the way, by the wisdom and the admonitions of God; and that he may understand His wisdom and His infinite love. Man could not have composed this as a whole, could not have foreseen the necessity for each part. One feels in it the energetic spontaneity of life, that is to say, of the Spirit of God. But take away one single part-when we possess the whole-and the breach is immediately felt by one who has seen and appreciated its completeness. The perfection of the whole is manifested, as in everything which God has made, from the insect which sports in the air, to the admirable details of the body of man, united to a mind which can be taken lip with God, and, through grace, express Him in His countenance even, and in His ways. The Word is not a shapeless mass, it is the complete body of the revealed thoughts of God. More perfect even than man to whom it is addressed, because more immediately divine, it expresses itself in man, because God will introduce man into it; but it is God who expresses in it all His thoughts. Yes, man who would be wise, does not understand this body, because he does not perceive it; he judges one of its members according to the little pitiful history of ecclesiastical weaknesses and contentions, the most pitiful of all contentions. The things of the Spirit are spiritually discerned. Divine perfection shines forth at every page for him who is spiritual; and the unity of the whole, the perfect connection of its several parts, the relation of these parts to each other and to all the ways of God, to the person of Christ, to the Old Testament, to the heart of the renewed man who, through grace, knows himself, to the necessities of sinful man, to the dangers and difficulties which long afterward sprang up in the Church, all combine to crown with divine glory the demonstration of the origin and the true Author of the book which contains these things. Its author is so much the more evidently. God, from the human instruments having been many and diverse. But its unity and, above all, the intimate union of its different parts, demonstrate a complete and perfect body. If but one joint of a finger were wanting to a man, he is not a man such as God made him; it is at once perceived, he may have life, but he is imperfect. Take away a book from the New Testament, the remainder is divine undoubtedly, but it is no longer the New Testament in its divine perfection. As in a noble tree the inward energy, the freedom of the sovereign power which works in it, produces a variety of forms, in which the details of human order may appear to be wanting, but in which there is a beauty that no human art can imitate. Cut off one of its branches, the void is obvious; the minute connection of the remainder is destroyed, the gap which is made in the intertwining of its tender leaves proves that the devastating hand of man has been there. This then is how the Christian possesses the Word; each part of it acts divinely in him, and, in proportion to the progress he makes, it unfolds itself as a whole to the eyes of his faith, with a divine evidence which unites itself with every element of his faith, with the varied glories of the person of Christ, and with the universal perfection of the ways of God; a perfection of which the christian has not judged a priori, but which he has learned in the Word itself.
When I see a man do I need to be told that his form is complete? The more I know of anatomy the more I shall admire its structure. But it is the sight of the man himself which makes me apprehend his perfectness. Thus it is with all the works of God; only His Word requires, as it produces, spiritual discernment. If any one be a prophet or spiritual let him acknowledge it. And do you know how the Word disposes of those who do not acknowledge it? "If any be ignorant let him be ignorant." It is humbling, no doubt, to have all one's learning treated thus; but this is as it should be between God and man. I repeat, I doubt not that outward evidences confirm the spiritual judgment. The learned man who creates doubts for himself, needs evidences to remove them. The simple Christian feeds on that which is divine, and knows nothing of the difficulties which man's poor learning creates. Lastly, I will go over, in order to show their futility, some of the arguments which are used to deny inspiration. It is a melancholy task, after having had one's thoughts directed towards the perfection of the Bible.
The first thing which strikes one is that all is judged from without. We are told that at the time of the reformation one authority was substituted for another. But observe, it is not through anything found in the Bible that unbelief judges its authority. Men would have faith to rest upon historical certainty and moral evidence. But this skews entire ignorance of what faith is. He who could be satisfied with this has never had divine conviction, feels not the need of divine faith, and knows not its nature; for no historical or moral certainty can be faith more or less. Faith comes from God, and receives a testimony, whereupon it sets to its seal that God is true. The rationalist, who has not the Spirit, can only see in Scripture the testimony of the man who wrote it. This is easy to be understood. He gives up the Spirit and the Word together, and falls back upon his own reason. Stress is laid also on the imperfection of the text of the New Testament, on its being written in a dead language, on its being read in translations; and, finally-, we are told that its authors followed the opinions of the day in which they lived. This last objection is itself but a judgment formed upon the opinions of the present day, and is not worth a refutation. It is an accusation, not a proof: and the accusation is but a calumny. In fact if it were well-founded, the same should be said of the Lord's own discourses, or the whole history should be rejected as false (see John 3:33, 34; 8:4733He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true. 34For he whom God hath sent speaketh the words of God: for God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him. (John 3:33‑34)
47He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God. (John 8:47)). As to the other objections, I have a divine certainty of their futility, because, as I have already shown, the Lord has set his seal to the Old Testament scriptures, in spite of the same difficulties. I would add a few words. Those who reason in this way confound the-rule of faith with the means by which it is made known; in the latter, the imperfection of the instrument is felt. No one would assert that a translation was divine; but this is merely saying that through human diligence we profit by a divine work. The deposit, the rule of faith, remains in its original purity.
If clouds, formed by exhalations from the earth, obscure the light of the sun, they only prove, by thus veiling it, the power of that light which still suffices for all human purposes, although not seen in all its brightness. This objection, then, only tells us that when God gives blessing, we profit by the blessing according to our diligence. But this is not all. It is said that we do not even possess the original in its purity. This is, in the main, the same principle we have just touched on.
All that God gives He puts into the hands of men for their use, and they never know how to keep it as they ought. The revelation of God has been placed in the hands of men-of the Church. Man has not preserved it in its absolute perfection: be it so. God allows man to learn what he is; but faith knows that behind all this, there is the faithfulness of God, who watches over the Church, and that Christ nourishes and cherishes her. Experience teaches, and the Day of Judgment will make manifest, that faith in God is always in the right. Thus the believer quite supposes it possible that, through the carelessness of man, some defects may have crept into that which was committed to him; but he has full confidence in the faithfulness of God. His experience, as we have seen, confirms his faith, for he finds the Word divine. The judgment of God will decide that question for the unbeliever, which. divine faith has already decided for the believer.
The examination of the text by learned men has, indeed, shown the rashness of infidel knowledge; but has left no serious doubt, except as to an extremely small number of texts, or rather of words, nor a shadow of obscurity upon any passage of the slightest importance as to the truth.
One learns that God was there, as much in His caring for, as in His gift of, the Word; although, apparently, He left all to the responsibility of man. To say that the meaning of a passage is doubtful, in order to deny its inspiration, is too absurd an argument to be repeated. It is saying, that the ignorance and incapacity of man are a proof that God has not acted in anything which man does not understand. There is a superficiality in such reasoning as this, which reveals the true value of mere human wisdom. The meaning is doubtful! doubtful to whom? I ask. It is said that the writers of the New Testament implicitly followed the translation of the Seventy. The contrary is the truth. When this translation gives the sense they used it. Half their quotations are faithfully rendered from the Hebrew; and if there are passages which differ from the present Hebrew text, the researches of the learned have proved that they are borne out by the testimony of the oldest translations. In many instances the meaning is given without attaching themselves to the exact words. Conscientious research on this point strongly confirms the divine inspiration of the authors of the New Testament. Inaccuracies, errors, and contradictions are alleged. I deny these contradictions and these inaccuracies. Let us remember that the certainty of the objector's knowledge must be first ascertained, and I have no confidence in it. I have known many cases in which man would prune away the fruit of the spontaneous actings of the Spirit, and carve the beautiful tree into a round or a square. For my part, I have seen divine perfection in the form it has. All is divinely. adapted to the object which the Holy Ghost had in view. We have seen that John does not mention the prayer of Jesus in Gethsemane; Matthew and Luke omit what John relates. What does this prove to me? That John was not there? Not so; but that the Holy Ghost is the author of the two accounts, and not John and Matthew. Man would have related what man had seen. The Holy Ghost sets before me in the one Gospel, the man and the Messiah suffering; in the other, the Divine Person who offered up Himself, and whose life no man took from Him. I see divine perfection where human wisdom see blemishes. Luke puts the offer of the kingdoms of the earth before the temptation on the pinnacle of the Temple, and, in consequence, omits "Get thee hence, Satan!" "This is wrong!" cries the worldly scholar. "What perfection!" says the Christian. Matthew gives the historical order, Luke the moral order; for the spiritual temptation, through the written word, was of a deeper character than that of the offer of the whole world. The Man, the Messiah, Son of Man, the Holy One, relying on the promises, duly succeed each other. Now this moral order is characteristic of the whole of Luke's Gospel, excepting where the historical order is necessary to the truth of the recital. It is the Holy Ghost who writes. I have found difficulties in the Word: this has not surprised me, ignorant as I am; but I have found these difficulties, one after another, to be but the means of entering more fully into the perfection, the wisdom, and the divine beauty of the revelation of my God. If I still find more of these difficulties, and I do so, I wait upon Him to solve them for me; and I do not say "the meaning is doubtful," but "the meaning is doubtful to me." I do not say " there is inaccuracy- and I am accurate enough to judge it without divine light;" but "I am ignorant, and God will enlighten me in due time." Some have even gone so far as to say, that Scripture does not lay claim to inspiration. This shows an ignorance, or a disregard, of its contents, which, especially on such a subject, renders the arguments of those who could assert it unworthy of the attention of a serious man. The apostle asserts the exact contrary in the most clear and absolute manner. We have already seen how the Word, as a principle, speaks of the Scriptures. I will not return to it. I have already exposed the folly of the argument, that inspiration is limited to the passage which asserts it-I say its folly; for why could not a text say, "All these writings are inspired." The fact is, that the passages which assert it, limit it neither to the book which contains them, nor to the writings of the same author. They establish a principle, or allude to the writings of another, to invest them with the authority of Scripture. They establish the existence of a class of writings having divine authority; they ascribe this authority to the entire Old Testament.
The Church, it is also said, may have made mistakes. Be it so; but is there no God? Would He allow us to be deceived on so essential a point? Those who do not know His goodness answer that He might; and boldly pronounce about books which have edified the Church for centuries. But what is this opinion worth? That must be settled before we allow it to invalidate the Book it refers to. I by no means admit the authority of the Church; but I recognize that it is her duty to preserve the deposit committed to her; and I believe in the faithfulness of God. In a certain sense, everything is necessarily referred to individual judgment, that is to say, each one is under its responsibility for himself. A Socinian claims a right to deny the divinity of Christ and the Atonement. Were I the Pope, I could not hinder his thinking so; but being a Christian, I know that he is lost if he remain in this state. I cannot make another believe the inspiration of the New Testament: each one must judge for himself. But he who rejects the Word, the Word will reject him. He is bolder than man should dare to be; but he will not be stronger than God. Salvation does not depend on faith in the inspiration of the New Testament. A man may be saved, without knowing that the book exists, by the truth which it contains reaching his heart through the lips of another. To reject the Word of God, when it is before us, is quite another thing.
I admit that there is a difference between the inspiration of the New Testament and that of the Old; not as to its authority, but as to its character. The prophets of old said, "Thus saith the Lord"; and they announced the thoughts of God, in His own words, on a particular subject, at the moment when his word was addressed to them. But the Holy Ghost-come down as the Comforter to lead into all truth-is different from the Spirit of Prophecy, although the same Spirit (see 1 Pet. 1:11, 1211Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. 12Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into. (1 Peter 1:11‑12)). He searches all things, even the deep things of God." "Ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things." Christ being glorified, the Holy Ghost dwells in His disciples, and can open all the treasures of the glory of the Lord, all the tenderness of His love, of His connection, as man, with his own. God was made man, and God the Holy Ghost dwells in the Church, and thus, if I may so speak, humanizes Himself, while not ceasing to be God; He expresses Himself in grace and blessing in all the details and circumstances of human life: He helps our infirmities. He that searcheth the heart, knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, because He maketh intercession for the saints according to God.
The inspiration of the New Testament partakes of this character. It unfolds itself, in the unity of the Church, in feelings and affections, and ministers to her need by telling of the love and the ways of the God-man in a world of sinners; but if the Holy Ghost has thus acted in the Church, united to the Head whom he glorifies, what He spoke and what he caused to be written, was none the less the Word of God, the thoughts of God communicated in words of His own teaching. As Christ did not cease to be God because he was made man, so he that received the testimony of Christ set to his seal that God is true. We do not give up (alas! too many human teachers have given it up) that presence of the Holy Ghost in the church which. produces religious inspiration; that is, the energy which acts in power and blessing in Christians, without making them an authority; neither do we give up the authority of that which has been communicated, whether by word of mouth (had we been present to profit by it), or by writings and words taught by the Holy Ghost; nor do we give up those things which are the Lord's commands..
Observe also, that it is not apostolic authority only which is the question, but the authority of the Word of God. A prophet who spoke by inspiration, and who could say, "The Holy Ghost saith, Separate me Barnabas and Saul;" had as much authority in that instance as Paul or Barnabas. He was but the mouth of God, just as what Paul and Barnabas spoke by the same inspiration was the Word of God. To allege that the Gospels were not written by Apostles is idle. If an Apostle had written without being inspired, his book would only have had the value of that of a godly man. If one of the least in the Church has been used by the Holy Ghost, his book has the authority of the Word of God. The infinite value of Scripture proceeds from its Author, and not, in any instance, from the spiritual personality of its authors.
The two Gospels which are not written by Apostles are none the less the perfect presentation of God manifest in the earth, in that aspect which the Holy Ghost had in view. It is Christ, it is God, who was there. The instrument used in giving us the history of our Savior is of no importance; the only essential thing is, that Christ should be faithfully presented as He was, as God would present Him.
Doubts are raised especially about the Epistle of Jude, the second of Peter, and the Apocalypse. Let us briefly examine these three books. Peter's Epistle contains the assertion that it was written by himself: it has a tone of deep and spiritual holiness, a dignified confidence, most remote from imposture; yet such it must be if it were not written by the Apostle Peter. I find in it minute allusions to things which happened to himself, related elsewhere, which would not have occurred to an impostor: not the smallest deviation from divine truth: a solemnity and an authority nowhere found except in inspired writings: a direct application to the soul, as from God, of the authority of its contents, which is one characteristic of Inspiration. The manner in which the Word is used in it, as well as the events of the life of Christ, has a divine character. We see in it also a knowledge and a use of the grand principles of divine truth, which are unquestionably original, and which possess, at the same time, that divine force which belongs to the whole Bible; an absence of amplification only to be found in the Bible, and which is the result of that consciousness of authority with which an inspired man would speak, or which was rather the natural consequences of his divine authority. Those who have read the Epistle of Barnabas, which some would compare with that of Peter, will be able to judge of the difference between them, and of the discernment of those who could put it on a level with that of the Apostle. Not to say that it is scarcely doubtful that this so called Epistle of Barnabas is a fabrication, even the one which has been sifted, one has but to read the Epistles of the Fathers (called apostolic) to see that God has guarded the testimony of His Word by the counter-proof of the futility of the writings even of the Apostle's companions; one would scarcely find so much nonsense in these days, even in the religious books written for children. There are two epistles by Clement-kind and amiable enough -written to make peace at Corinth, but they are the only passable ones; and even these are as inferior to the New Testament as, doubtless, the humility of the author would have admitted them to be. Jude is accused of having made use of fables and apocryphal books in his Epistle; but where is the proof of this? The Epistle, on the whole, contains deep and wonderful instruction as to the features of the Apostasy which is foretold in other parts of the Word; supplying elements which, although linking themselves with the whole Scripture, are found no where else. It contains deep principles of eternal and divine truth, and sketches, with surprising distinctness in a few words, the moral progressive steps of man's apostasy; as well as its historical beginnings in the Church, beginnings confirmed doctrinally, and by allusions to other parts of the New Testament. It bears the same marks of inspiration and divine authority which I have pointed out in Peter, and the same contrast with what we know to be of man. But, it is said, there are fables in it; which are they? Is the fall of the angels a fable? The Lord Himself tells us that Satan is a fallen being: we learn from Peter that there are angels reserved for judgment. The temerity of human knowledge calls everything which is beyond its reach a fable. Jude and Peter are borne out, if that were needful, by other passages. All Revelation is a fable to him who believes not: perhaps Michael contending with the devil is meant. But this, as a scriptural principle, is recognized, not only in the Apocalypse and the second of Peter, but also in the book of Daniel (10:20, 21), quoted by the Lord Himself; and that passage chews that Michael especially interests himself in Israel: He is there called their prince. We find the same thing in Dan. 12:11And at that time shall Michael stand up, the great prince which standeth for the children of thy people: and there shall be a time of trouble, such as never was since there was a nation even to that same time: and at that time thy people shall be delivered, every one that shall be found written in the book. (Daniel 12:1), a chapter, one part of which is especially pointed out as worthy of attention by the Lord Jesus. It proves that Michael is used of the Lord in behalf of Israel. One can easily understand the use which the Israelites would have made of the body of Moses, as we know what they did for centuries with the brazen serpent. We know also that the Lord buried him, carefully concealing the place of his interment. Does He not use the angels in His service, for these things, and Michael especially, for Israel, and against Satan, who opposed his service to that people. So that there is not an element contained in Jude's statement that is not borne out, in principle, by the general testimony of the word of God. That Jude should have been commissioned to add another act to all this is no difficulty to one, whose mind is imbued with the word of God. On the contrary, there is much solemnity in the instruction. It has none of those curious and idle details which we find in the fables of the apocryphal books; but that which throws much light on that invisible world of Providence, the existence of which is proved by a multitude of passages, and which will be unveiled to us when we shall know even as we are known. If I reason thus, it is not that I question the inspiration of Jude: no; for his whole epistle is stamped with the love, the holiness, and the authority of God; and has its own manifest place in the series of the books of the New Testament. I am not proving the truth of what Jude spoke by inspiration, but the superficial character of the objections brought against the epistle. As to the accusation of borrowing from the apocrypha, where is it proved? I conclude it is the prophecy of Enoch which '2 alluded to, as it is found in an apocryphal book, bearing the name of Enoch, which was published in England some years ago, and which exists in the Ethiopian language. But there is no shadow of a proof that Jude borrowed it from this Ethiopian book. There would be nothing extraordinary in the idea that the author of the so-called book of Enoch may have been acquainted with this prophecy. The prophecy itself is confirmed by a multitude of passages in the Old and New Testament. Its divine truth is proved by innumerable texts of all kinds. Is the preserving that which is certainly true, and nothing else, a proof of not being directed by God, whilst he who composes a book, known to be an imposture, adds to it a mass of crudities? Is it not rather a proof to the contrary, if proof were needed? Jude gives us a true prophecy, and nothing else. Another avails himself of the truth of this prophecy, which had come to his knowledge, to accredit a mass of errors. And this is brought forward as a proof that the former was not under the direction of God, and that he must have quoted the true prophecy from him, who made so bad a use of it And this is called reasoning, and wisdom, and knowledge! To a Christian, the preservation of this prophecy has an affecting interest. In adding the fact of its having been prophesied by Enoch, to a truth taught elsewhere, we have a testimony that, even before the flood, the man of God, who walked with Him, who was taken from the world—as the church will one day be had already, at that early period, announced the judgment of the world he was leaving. "Known unto God are all His works, from the beginning of the world." All His purposes are fixed beforehand, whatever may be His patience and His dealings in long-suffering and in righteousness with man, ere those purposes be accomplished.
In short, to say that this passage has been taken from an apocryphal book is an assertion destitute of proof. It is a question whether this book were in existence when Jude wrote his Epistle. The date of the apocryphal book of Enoch is controverted. And this must be settled before there can be any foundation whatever for alleging that the passage in Jude was taken from it.
We have only now to consider the Apocalypse. This book is only rejected because not understood. Ignorance assumes the office of judge, and decides with the temerity natural to it. It is obscure in its style, to one not familiar with the Word; and in its matter, because it treats of subjects which naturally tend to make it so. But there is no book in the New Testament of which the date and the author are established by more precise, more ancient, and more competent evidences; not one which has acted in a more holy and solemn manner on the conscience of true Christians; not one which—if it be not the simple truth, commending itself—links itself more admirably with the whole structure of the New' Testament, completing the whole edifice; and the absence of which, in this respect, would be more sensibly felt. Not one that connects itself so much with, the. Old Testament, by borrowing the imagery of the prophets to unfold its revelations, while so far altering it as to adapt it to the New Testament.
This mode of acting forms the most perfect connection between heavenly and earthly things—a connection fully established in the New Testament-and makes the symbols more easy to be understood, and the object of the book more apparent. There is scarcely a point, from the first chapter of Genesis, with which the Apocalypse does not link itself, without effort, and in a manner which is altogether beyond human art. This book has the impress, the lofty range, the perfection of the mind of God, precisely in those things from which man has endeavored, apart from the Bible, to borrow something from God to give a more exalted character to the idolatry of his own heart. Creation-the Jew-Man, his power in the world, the work of Satan, that of Christ in its results of glory to Himself and to the earth, the church, the condition of the saints in relation to God and to the earth, the government and the long-suffering of God, the angels-all these subjects are treated of, set in their relations to each other and to God, and yet in no respect whatever is this book deficient, as to any one doctrine revealed in the Word; not copying these doctrines, but expressing them in new forms and in altogether new circumstances, which throw fresh light upon the former ones, and receive it from them in return.
One understands, that a book which, like the Bible, sets forth all the ways of God, from the creation to the return of that creation—long rebellious and miserable, but now redeemed-into the order and blessing in which it is set, by the fullness of God, in safety, shutting out that only which is incompatible with the blessing itself; one can understand, that a book which reveals the eternal Son of God, who was before creation, standing in the midst of this whole scene, to bring out of it glory to His Father, and a more beautiful order than that which had been lost; one can understand, I say, that such a book would not close without taking up again all the threads of this wondrous divine process, in those results which (when the work of the Son is perfected, and all things subdued) will bring in the full and perfect dominion of Him who surrounds Himself with the eternal blessing of that God who has made himself known in Him. This is what the Apocalypse sets before us.
Who is it (to enter into some details of another part, of this book), who is it that in choosing seven churches (a number which, in itself, suggests the idea of a complete whole), could give us, in two short chapters, every moral position in which the Church (and even every individual who has ears to hear) could be found, from the beginning to the end of its career? Who is it that could, with this, give us the most precious revelation of heavenly blessings, adapted as special encouragement to the difficulties of each of these respective conditions, and, at the same time, revelations of the divine and varied glory of the person of the Son of God, a glory which beams with all-pervading brightness over every part of the subject; and that in such details as are calculated to strengthen those who are in the circumstances which, these chapters describe, whilst making known to all the glory of Him who speaketh. This is what we find in chapters ii. and iii. of the Apocalypse. One understands, also, that when the inspired communications made to the. Church were about to be closed; when those who were commissioned by God to superintend were being remove- and evil, as the Word. everywhere testifies, was coming in like a flood; one can understand, I say, that the Spirit of God should have thus left to the Church-to the faithful who needed it-a moral summary, which could meet their need in the moral darkness which was gathering around them; a summary which, if God aroused those who were His, would explain the course of events which had taken place during this darkness, and make it manifest that nothing happened without God, even although the Church might slumber; a summary which would, also, give warning of the judgment which will fall upon that which, in the world, is the result of this forsaking of God and of His light by the Church, or by those who profess to be the Church; in a word, upon that which is the result of this corruption of God's -last manifestation of Himself to man-a result which will leave room for nothing but judgment-a judgment which will establish righteousness by divine power.
One understands that such a book as this would close up the revelations of God. Rationalism sees nothing in it but historical speculations-an opinion worthy of such a system. That there should be in it things hard to be understood is not to be wondered at.; it is only in proportion as the Church awakens, takes her place (in humbling herself,) and apprehends her true relationship to God, that she will be able also to acquire a Divine understanding of this rich treasury of all which enlightens her outward position, and to comprehend the way in which God resumes the government of the world to place it in the hands of the First-begotten, whom He brings into it.
Rationalism prefers man to God, or, at least, would rather listen to him, and that is in truth preferring him. This will be exclaimed against as calumny. I shall be glad of it, for at least it will show that conscience feels it is a horrible thing if true; and that a system which has this for its root and principle, condemns itself. Well then, I repeat it, it prefers man to God, and avows that it does so. The Bible is no longer the Word of God for the rationalist. Human reason pronounces upon it, upon its verity, upon its moral worth; but it is self-evident that this cannot be done with the Word of God. It is equally certain that the rationalist does thus judge the Bible, and chooses rather to rely on his own reason than to acknowledge Divine authority, be it in what book it may. One of the most recent expositors of this doctrine in France, says, " The Bible is no longer the Word of God, and I know not what detriment it will be to the cause of piety to exchange a written code for the living produce of apostolic individuality," that is to say, an inspired collection which has the authority of God, " a uniform impress of divinity," for that which gives man in his individuality, man as he is, godly perhaps, yet man; " authority for history; and, to speak plainly, a cabalistic ventriloquy, for the noble accents of the human voice." If this be not preferring the word of man to the Word of God, what is it? Inspiration, which makes man the mouth and the voice of God, is a cabalistic ventriloquy!!
This author would have the human voice: he thinks it a more noble voice. Poor rationalists! self-admirers, to whom the voice of God, too clearly heard, is a deathly alarm; an unknown sound, which too plainly tells them what they are! Yet hearken to it, ye wise men, who are tempted of Satan to search into good and evil by yourselves; hearken to it: you will find it a voice of grace which can restore you, if it convict you, and cover your moral nakedness with the perfection and the glory of the second Adam-of the Son of God.
One of the shapes which error has taken of late years, is to assert that rejecting the inspiration of the Bible and its authority over believers, allows the Holy Ghost to resume His right place. I fully allow that the Church has grievously forgotten the presence and authority of the Holy Ghost dwelling in her. But I cannot understand how rejecting the authority. of what He has already spoken, can enhance His authority. It appears to me to be rather opening the door to human pretensions and the devices of Satan. I have seen the latter effect produced by the same cause; and in the writings which advocate this system, we are already given over to the former. " Instead of the authority of the Word, we shall
have the word of authority; instead of referring the poor proselyte to the articles of a code, to the ritual of a dogmatist [which I would no more do, than the author whom I quote], or to the pages of I know not what mysterious oracles; we will refer him to all the great prophets of all ages, to the living instruction of the Church, to the Word of God, personified in His servants, to the Spirit and to His manifestations, in a word, to the immediate contact of the heart with truth." How my heart would be in more immediate contact with truth, by listening to the voice of man, than by listening to " the words which the Holy Ghost teacheth," is difficult to conceive. I accept "the manifestation of the Spirit," if by that is only meant the exercise of spiritual gifts for the edification of the Church, and the energy of the Spirit manifested in these gifts; but I warn the believer to be carefully on his guard against all false claims to these " manifestations." I have witnessed such, and could plainly see in them the presence and active energy of Satan. It is not every spirit which is the Spirit of God; and Satan can disguise himself as an angel of light. Such manifestations, when accompanied by the rejection of the Word and of its direct authority over the soul, proceed from the enemy of souls. This is the case with the Irvingites, and there have been others. It seems to me that the enemy is preparing some attempt of this kind, if the Lord hinder him not. The Church in general does not sufficiently own the Holy Ghost to have real strength against such pretensions. But it is not in giving up the Word which the Spirit has given us, that we shall find strength.
Observe, we are asked to give up that which we have now heard called " I know not what mysterious oracles," but which Stephen calls "the lively oracles," and Paul, " the oracles of God" (and remark, the lively oracles were the letter), and to give ourselves up to "all the great prophets of all ages," i.e. to all the vagaries of the human mind, without God, perhaps under the influence of Satan, and that without remedy; for there is no Word of God, only the noble accents of the human voice, and a word of authority: that is to say, whether it be an individual, or a body, which assumes this authority, man, instead of God.
I recognize the existence of the evil which this system attacks. It is one of the commonest devices of the enemy, to attack an evil when it grows old and loses its power over the mind of man, in order to set up some other evil more in accordance with the state of men's minds. Thus the Roman mythology was assailed by the scoffs of infidelity, as soon as it had been shaken by Christianity. Eclectic philosophy began also to display itself. Modern rationalism is doing the same thing. It attacks that lifeless dogmatic theology which makes use of the name of God, to fetter-not man, but the Holy Ghost. But while doing this, instead of bringing us back to the authority of God, it sets up that of man; instead of restoring the liberty and the rights of the Spirit of God, it gives us up to the spirit of man, publishing its unbelief as to the Word, and undermining as far as it can, all that is certainly of God. This once taken away, and when (as they avow) there is no more authority, i.e. authority of God, which alone secures true liberty to man; when there is no other authority than that of him who speaks, or of the Church who will then be free.
It is said that faith in the person of the Savior will remain; doubtless this is the center and the strength of Christianity: but I do not very well know what this faith would be, or in what Savior, if the Word of God were taken from us.
The Holy Ghost is spoken of in this system:-I own most fully the way in which the precious Comforter sent down from Heaven has been grieved and forgotten; but, if the authority of the written Word be set aside, it is something vague and mystical, and nowise answering to what inspiration says of the Comforter. It is a kind of principle, which forms a community, and not the revealer of Christ, and the power of a Divine person in the Church.
The Holy Ghost is the only source of strength, of power, and of understanding in the Church, and in the Christian. But if you separate the idea of the Holy Ghost from the inspiration, and the authority of the written Word, you give yourself up-either to the imaginations of the mind of man, or to an authority which is merely human; whatever may be its pretensions, or the ecclesiastical form it may put on. It is authority, and not truth. The Word of God is the authority of the Truth, and of Him who reveals it
There is an important point which I have not yet brought forward; and on which I would add a few words.-That is, authority of the Word, independently of the effect it produces on the heart. I may be led to recognize the authority of the Word of God, through the effect it has had upon me; but, evidently, it is not this effect which gives it its authority. If the Word produces this effect, it is because it possessed the authority, which I recognized before I yielded to it. I recognize it, because it exists. If Christ pronounced the Words of God, his words had authority, whatever might be the unbelief of his hearers; that is to say, they possessed intrinsic authority. Nor have they lost it, by /being written. The Lord speaks of "Writings" being the highest order of means of communication. If the Apostle has made the will of God known to us in "words which the Holy Ghost teacheth," the revelations he received- his words have a divine authority over the conscience, even though they should be rejected by man. The authority of the Word does not depend upon its being received by him who hears. It is not he who is to judge it, except at his own peril. "The words which I speak, the same shall judge you in that day." This may indeed be called possessing authority, independently of him who would judge it.
We are not now discussing the authenticity of the Testimony, but its authority, allowing it to be authentic. Wherein lies this authority? Suppose two persons read a book of the Bible: the heart of one is touched and convinced of the divine authority of what he reads, the other remains in his unbelief. Does the authority of the Word depend on the faith of the one who believes, or is it the same for both; although unrecognized by him who believes not? It is evident that either he who believed was mistaken, or if not, that the authority of the book, although unrecognized by the unbeliever, is as great for him as for the one who bowed to it. The authority lies then in the Word itself, independently of the effect produced by it; or, of the opinion man forms of it. It possesses intrinsic authority. The judgment of the last day will prove it. " The words which I have spoken, the same shall judge you in that day." It could not be otherwise with the Word of God; but it is important clearly to establish this principle.
The Word of God can be of no profit, if it be not received; nevertheless it retains its full authority, because it is the Word of God. Unless the existence of any divine communication be denied, this principle cannot be questioned. He who denies all such communication is an unbeliever. So that the point is not to reason upon what the Church possesses in the Scriptures; but to convince an unbeliever. Moreover, this unbelief does not destroy the authority of the Word; for the rebellion of man cannot destroy the authority of God. The day of probation is granted to man: the day of judgment will make good the authority of God. The Word itself establishes this principle. "And, thou shalt speak my words unto them, whether they will hear, or whether they will forbear; for they are most rebellious" (Ex. 2:77Then said his sister to Pharaoh's daughter, Shall I go and call to thee a nurse of the Hebrew women, that she may nurse the child for thee? (Exodus 2:7)): Compare 1 John 3:11-2711Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness. 12If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? 13And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. 14And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. 22After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. 23And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized. 24For John was not yet cast into prison. 25Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying. 26And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him. 27John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven. (John 3:11‑27).-" He that believes has the witness in himself." This is the inward power of the testimony: " He that believeth not God hath made him a liar:" here is the guilt of him who believes not. The authority then, of Testimony from God is independent of the judgment man may pronounce upon it. The testimony will itself judge man.
Other passages, founded upon this principle, apply it to the Scriptures as a body of writings; seeing 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," 2 Tim. 3:1515And 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. (2 Timothy 3:15). Here the holy Scriptures exercise authority over man, from his childhood, as well as make the man of God perfect. It is not then the opinion of the man of God which determines the value of the Scriptures. He who knew their value as making the man of God perfect, recognized their, authority over him at a time when he was quite incapable of, judging at all on the subject. That is to say, they possessed full and absolute authority over him, independently of his power to receive them: an intrinsic and divine authority. The most advanced man of God is glad to receive them in this spirit, 1 Peter 2:1, 21Wherefore laying aside all malice, and all guile, and hypocrisies, and envies, and all evil speakings, 2As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby: (1 Peter 2:1‑2). The principle of authority is formally laid down by the Apostle in the same passage, " Continue thou in the things which thou hast learned-knowing of whom thou had learned them." The authority of Him from whom he had learned them, was the reason for continuing in them.
The intrinsic authority, then, of the testimony of Scripture is clearly established. Authority independent of the reception of the testimony by the hearer. So entirely independent that the Word will judge him who is not obedient to it. This proves to us that God has endued it with moral evidence, powerful enough to bring him in guilty, who does not receive the testimony; thereby making God a liar. Nevertheless, it is only the grace of God which can overcome the moral resistance of man's heart; unbelieving as it is by nature and by will, when God is in question, though full of credulity as to the things of man.
There is another point which I have only glanced at, and which I desire to put forward a little more plainly. Many circumstances testify that the narratives of the evangelists were not written merely by man, but by the Holy Ghost. John was one of the three apostles who were with Jesus in the garden of Gethsemane, close to the scene of His agony. He says not a word about it. Nothing can be more affecting and more solemn than the Savior's agony; and most certainly John had not forgotten it, for he remembers many other circumstances which are not to be found in the other gospels; for instance, that those who came to take Jesus went backward and fell to the ground. John accompanied Jesus also to the cross, yet he says not a word of His having been forsaken of God, although he relates a multitude of other circumstances which prove that the Savior was as calm there as when he showed Him to us in the garden. A man who had written the history of the sufferings of the Savior, would not have failed to relate things so deeply interesting, and of which he had himself been an eye-witness. Matthew also would have related the remarkable incident which occurred in the garden of Gethsemane, of which he was an eye-witness, namely, that they all fell to the ground; but he does not mention it, whilst he gives an account of the agony of Jesus and his prayer, although he was not one of the three who accompanied Him at that time.
Now, if you examine these gospels you will find, that this peculiarity-inexplicable as this would be if they were not inspired-becomes quite intelligible when we. recognize their inspiration. One and the same author wrote them all. The Holy Ghost, whose office it is to take of the things of Christ and to show them unto us, furnishes us in John with those circumstances of the history of Jesus which would bring out the glory of his person-His glory who offered Himself to God for us. In Matthew he gives us that which is needed to make known the suffering Messiah. The result is not only harmony between the parts of each gospel, but also between all the gospels; producing a perfect whole, exhibiting the design and the workmanship of one and the same author. This principle is applicable to the entire contents of the four, gospels. I have only called the reader's attention to the garden of Gethsemane and to the cross as striking instances. One who is well versed in the gospels, and who has spiritual discernment, would know by the manner in which the subject is presented, in which gospel it is to be found. Compare the connection between the end of Matt. 21 and the parable in the beginning of 22: also the way in which the corresponding parable in Luke 14:1616Then said he unto him, A certain man made a great supper, and bade many: (Luke 14:16) is introduced, with that of the husbandmen in Luke 20, and you will perceive that the substance, the form, and the diversities of these parables are in perfect harmony with the design of each gospel. In Matthew, the rejection of Christ in connection with the relation of the Messiah to the Jews; in Luke, the moral order of the events, the acts and ways of the God of grace, founded on the broader, more moral and less official basis of the character of the Son of Man. The same thing may be observed in comparing Matt. 24 and Luke 22
There is another testimony to the truth of inspiration, the peculiar character of which deserves the reader's attention. It applies especially to the Old Testament; but it brings out very clearly the difference between the inspiration of the Old, and that of the New. It is that the prophets did not understand their own prophecies, but studied them as we might do. We read in 1 Peter 1:1111Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. (1 Peter 1:11)-" Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister," etc. They searched into that which the Holy Ghost had spoken through themselves. Their inspiration was so absolute, and so independent of the workings of their own minds, that they sought the meaning of what they uttered, as one of us might do. This is not precisely the character of the inspiration of the New Testament; but it is not, therefore, the less real. It is declared in the succeeding words-" reported unto you by them that have preached the Gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven."
The Holy Ghost sent down from Heaven leads into all truth, and thus inspiration acts in the understanding and by the understanding; but it is not the less inspiration. On the contrary, the apostle Paul preferred the inspiration which acts by the understanding, to that which is, apparently, more independent of the man. 1 Cor. 14:14-1914For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful. 15What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also: I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. 16Else when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? 17For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified. 18I thank my God, I speak with tongues more than ye all: 19Yet 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 Corinthians 14:14‑19)-" If I pray in a tongue, my spirit prayeth; but my understanding is unfruitful." Dan. 12:88And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? (Daniel 12:8) gives us an example of that which Peter describes" And I heard, but understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of those things? And He said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end."
The reader will remember that the passage I have quoted, is the one to which the Lord Himself referred the disciples, in order that they might understand it. Now if the prophet did not understand the revelation he gave; if the prophets searched into their own prophecies to understand them, it is most evident that those prophecies were given through direct and positive inspiration. I desire to add a thought which tends to confirm the truth I seek to maintain, and which applies to the whole of the Bible. Our attention is called to the fact that the Bible is not one book, but a collection of writings by different authors. It is precisely on this fact I ground my argument, adding to it that they were written at periods very remote from each other. In spite of this great diversity of times and of authors, there is a perfect unity of design and of doctrine: a unity, the separate parts of which are so linked with each other, and so entirely adapted to each other, that the whole work is evidently that of one and the same Spirit, one and the same mind; with one purpose, carried on from the beginning to the end, whatever might be the date of each separate book. And this, not at all by means of mere uniformity of idea, for the Promises are quite distinct from the Law; and the Gospel of Grace is distinct from them both; nevertheless, its parts are so correlative, and form so harmonious a whole, that with the least attention, one cannot fail to perceive that it is the production of ONE MIND. Now there is but One who lived through all the ages during which the various books of the Bible were written, and that One is the HOLY GHOST.
Look at Genesis. You will find doctrines, promises, types which are in perfect harmony with that which is more fully developed in the New Testament events, which in this book are narratives, related with the greatest simplicity; yet in such a manner as to give the most perfect picture of things which should happen in after, ages. Feelings natural to piety (speaking historically) are so related as to possess a meaning, which when we have the key to it, throws light upon the most precious doe, trines of the New Testament, and the most remarkable events of prophecy. Look at Exodus; and you will find the same thing. Everything is made according to the pattern Moses saw in the Mount, and furnishes us with the clearest exposition we possess of the ways of God in Christ. At the same time the Law is given. A Law which is not imitated in the Gospel, which does not contain a copy of it, nor any human order. Nevertheless the Law is linked with the Gospel in a manner which makes it impossible to separate them, and which gives to the authority of this revelation, a divine and absolute character. Were it not so, Christ would have died to suffer the consequences of a partly human thing; for He bore the curse of the Law. Observe this carefully, the curse of the Law, revealed to man; and of which He had said, that not one jot or tittle should pass away, till all were fulfilled. And moreover, it was not when reasoning with the Jews, upon their own ground, that He said this; but when teaching His disciples, according to His own perfect wisdom, and solemnly setting before them the principles of His kingdom. Take Leviticus; the details of its sacrifices furnish a light, which throws upon the work of Christ, rays so bright that nothing could replace them; supplying a key to all the workings of the human heart, and an answer to all its need, such as it is found even among the heathen. These details prefigure every aspect of the work of Christ, as doctrinally unfolded in the New Testament, whether by Himself or His apostles. For the inspired writer, they were Jewish ordinances. Take Numbers, the history of the journey of God's people through the Wilderness. "These things," says the apostle, "happened to them for examples [types] and they are written for us, upon whom the ends of the world are come; "Who was it that wrote them for us? Certainly not Moses; although he was the human instrument. It was He who knoweth the end from the beginning, and who orders all things according to His good pleasure.
All the circumstances of Christian life are found treasured up in these oracles in so complete a manner, that the apostle could say, " They are able to make us wise unto salvation through faith in Jesus Christ. On the other hand, the New Testament is equally far from merely repeating the substance of the Old, or from making void its authority. It brings in an altogether new light, which-while setting aside a multitude of things, as fulfilled-throws a light upon the contents of the Old Testament, which alone gives it its true bearing. All this applies to the moral, and to the ceremonial Law; to the history of the Patriarchs; to the royalties of David and of Solomon; to the sentiments expressed in the Psalms, as well as to other subjects. Is it not ONE MIND which has done all this? Was it the mind of Moses or of Paul? Assuredly not. Observe also, that all this refers to Christ, and to all the various glories of Christ; glories which God alone knew, so as to reveal them beforehand; and to give, in the history and ordinances of His people, and even in that which is related. of the world, precisely that which would serve for the development of all that was to be manifested in His Son Jesus. Accordingly, what says Peter? (Acts 2) " Men and brethren, let me freely speak unto you of the patriarch David; that he is both dead and buried, and his sepulcher is with us unto this day; therefore being a prophet, and seeing this before, he spake of the resurrection of Christ, that His soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption."
I will not go through all the books of the Bible, to give proofs of this unity of design, which is manifested in a work wrought by such various instruments, and at periods so remote from each other. A unity realized in the accomplishment of a work which precludes all idea of its having been intended by the persons who executed it. I only use this thought in confirmation of the doctrine I maintain; but to one who has any knowledge of the Word of God, it is an incontestable proof.
I will add but one word. In judging of Inspiration by the precision of the account, a mistake is committed as to what should be sought for. The Holy Ghost does not aim at that accuracy which would be needful to prove the truthfulness of man. The Holy Ghost has always a moral or spiritual object; the revelation of some eternal principle of truth and grace. Every circumstance which has no bearing upon His object is omitted. He pays no attention to accuracy in that respect. But the moral accuracy is all the greater on this account; and the picture presented to the conscience much more complete. The introduction of something needful to human accuracy, would spoil the perfection of the whole, as God's testimony. God does not seek to amuse the mind of man by stories to no purpose, but to instruct his heart by truth. This might sometimes make it rather difficult to balance the whole, as a mere narrative; but there are two ways of explaining the cause of a difficulty-the ignorance of him who feels the difficulty, or the impossibility of the thing which has perplexed him. And man willingly attributes to the latter cause, that which proceeds from the former. He who understands the design of the Holy Ghost in what He says, seizes the perfection of the Word, where the mind of man is perplexed by a thousand obstacles.