God’s Work and Word
The facts of the Gospel are divine proof that God has purposes of His own to accomplish through man's history in this' world. This world has already been the scene of a work preeminently and exclusively divine: And the question is::Are the Scriptures His word.? Do they give to man divine truth, and not human speculation, on the import of that which He has wrought? His work on earth by which He has revealed himself to man, and His word, bear the same witness. They must together be rejected or together be received as rendering the two-fold witness, without collusion, by which is established every word of the message they bear from God to man. The test the Scriptures bind themselves to is as definite and conclusive as it is unexampled in character. They certainly declare that God has spoken to man by what he has done. Has he also, we may ask, given His word, by which we may know with certainty what His purposes are, and what the glory and worth of that which He has accomplished?
These writings are as varied and distinct in subject as in the occasion of their contents, but are capable (it is not necessary to claim more than must be owned by the rationalist) of being shown to contain throughout a consistent and harmonious teaching that unites and interprets all by its accord with and testimony to facts of a preeminently divine nature, that came into existence subsequently to the time of writing. Would the rationalist contend that such a harmony is to be looked for in mere literary relics? If so, let him adduce one 'instance of the actual existence of whit he says is possible.
It will be specially instructive to consider the harmony in the truth revealed by the facts of the Gospel with that which is found, throughout the Scriptures. For that which is popularly and religiously held as the truth of Christianity; after the facts have been professedly received, is so contrary to what the, facts do teach, that teaching antecedent to the facts, and in accord with truth revealed by these facts, proves itself divine. If the result of human teaching, even with the very knowledge of the facts merely de, grades, all to a human level, is it to be supposed that human, teaching could have given a clear and distinct testimony to the truth of the Gospel before this earth Thad been the scene of these wondrous events?
To what extent the Old Testament Scriptures are capable of accord with the divine facts of the New will now be our inquiry.
Divine Truth and Popular Theology Contrasted.
The postulates which underlie popular religious teaching universally will hardly be denied by any to be:
(1). First that man in himself has some good in him.
(2). That he must strive in order to develop the good that is in him and make himself pleasing to God.
(3). That God will accept his endeavors, more especially if religious observances and sentiment be added thereto.
But human goodness fails to answer to either demand. It is incapable of taking one step with Him who came to meet man's true neediness. It proves itself also incapable of seeing any attractiveness in Christ. Its character is superficial and Christless, so that, having being corrupted, it is no longer goodness at all.
What a contrast is found in the kindness (i.e. philanthropy) and love of God which has been proved in His beloved Soli I He was the rich one who became poor, surrendering all, even to His life, for the sinner's good. In Him love was inseparably linked with light, and grace with truth. But this love is of God, not of man.)
The facts of the Gospel show each of these tenets to be contrary to the truth of God, as revealed and proved by what He has done:
(1). The Cross proves by fact that Man is a total ruin before God, and that there is nothing in him or in his conduct but what calls for death and judgment.
(2). "That having no good before God to develop; he needy. God to undertake for him, which in grace has been done. And he is now required to believe, not to strive at all for his justification.
(3). And thirdly, by the resurrection we know that Christ only has been accepted and we accepted only in Him. The only alternative to being in Christ is to be in one's sins.
Examples From the Old Testament,
It is not the purpose here, however, to prove from argument the total ruin of man's nature before God, but to show that the teaching of Scripture throughout is in accordance with the divine truth of the facts of the Gospel, and not with the popular estimate of-sin and its consequences.
To present evidence as to this in full, the whole of the Scriptures would have to be taken up in detail. This proof is the most powerful and conclusive possible, because of the immense variety of its character and its accumulative weight, and it cannot be wholly ignored. Yet if given with any completeness the work containing it attains such a size as causes it to be neglected save by those who already have considerable interest in the subject. An attempt, then, must be made to present evidence as briefly as possible but with sufficient variety and completeness to be conclusive. For if any approach the enquiry with Open-mindedness and without prejudice, proof that the teaching of the Old Testament is in truth only reconcilable with the facts of the New and with the divine Person, and Work of Him whom they concern, must in itself be sufficient evidence to decide as to the inspiration of the Scriptures:
Teaching From the First Chapters Relating to Sin and Its Consequences
The very first chapters, which recount the fall of man, present perhaps the simplest, fullest and most striking testimony in the whole Scripture to the divine truth revealed in the Gospel fads. That sin is in the world and is found in the heart, would hardly be denied by any. What are its consequences' as seen in the first chapter that speaks of it? Man's confidence in self, which prompts the attempt to mask his nakedness and' undertake for himself as best he can; his distrust of God, and. fear when the voice of God makes known to him that God has something to say to him, so that he cannot wait to listen to what it is; his inability to deny before God his nakedness, in spite of fig-leaves. And there appears yet grace, which clothes him with that which God has himself provided, and the consequent assurance Of God's satisfaction in that which He has Himself given. Man finds that after all there is grace. Moreover he learns that before he can be clothed there must be death.
So in the following chapter. The enmity in man's heart is found stirred up by having his offering to God rejected. It spoke of his best endeavors and the fruit of the toil-of his hands, but it was rejected. The offered lamb was accepted as well as he who offered God testifying to his gifts, we are told. Could
teaching be plainer, that man is rejected if he comes before God offering “the best he can do "? He is accepted in the offering that owns that his sin calls for death and judgment.
And so throughout the Scriptures Nadab and Abihu, sons of Aaron, perish for the presumption of offering, strange fire unto the Lord which' He had not commanded. But there is also the divine acceptance signified of that offering which had been offered in obedience to divine direction. The same passage which tells of their presumptuous sin and its consequence speaks also of the burnt offering which was wholly accepted.
From the Offerings
The same positive teaching is found in the offerings.
The general testimony of the facts and sacrifices of the Jewish dispensation, to the sacrifice of Christ in its needs and its effects, is so striking as to be felt by all, and recognized as such by all who make any pretense to Christianity.
Here again the depth and the wealth, the excellence and, the power of the instruction as to the worth and glory of that one great sacrifice which interprets all, will be found in the detail. But we must confine ourselves to the undeniable essentials of some only of the offerings, and compare them with the truth of the gospel.
The Burnt Offering
In the burnt offering, the offerer recognized the claims of God as paramount, and moreover that blessing depended upon giving to God His true and right place as God; and the essential feature of it was death, thus owning that the dishonor to God through sin required death.
How widely different is the general estimate of sin, as a „dishonor to God, from that shown in the burnt offering of the Old Testament; or in Him who was obedient even unto death, and that the death of the cross, that God might be honored by subjection and blessing established, not as man seeks it, by will, but by obedience even unto death!'
The Sin Offering and the Meat Offering
In the sin offering, the offerer presented to God an offering that represented his estimate of sin and its guilt.
Judgment had to consume all. “The head, the inwards, And the dung," had to be owned as equally corrupt because of sin and as calling for the same judgment. A more perfect or precise representation of total corruption—each and every part calling for the same judgment—and of the special holiness of that sacrifice by which sin was put away, it would not be possible to give. The injunction with reference to the meat offering, to the offerer who brought it as a “sweet savor unto the Lord," was that “no meat-offering that ye shall bring unto the Lord Shall be made "with leaven." The type once more finds its antitype only in Him who was the "Holy One" prophesied of throughout Scripture and testified to in the resurrection. The Old Testament makes the demand for a perfect and accepted life, apart from every taint of that corrupted nature common to every member of the race, and this is found in Him whom the New Testament reveals.
Sufficient evidence has now been given to prove that there is teaching of the plainest character possible in the Old Testament that accords wholly with that of the New and the Gospel of God it contains.
Another instance of the character and power of the teaching in the Old Testament may be seen in the clear light that is thrown by single statements there upon questions with respect to which men of the acutest minds are found confused.
The Power of One Statement From the Old Testament
Ritualism and Rationalism will be universally owned as the two principles that at the present day are exerting the most powerful influence over the minds of those professing Christianity. The principles, though apparently leading in precisely opposite directions, have something in common. In both, the anchor of the ship is dropped within its own hold and the ship is allowed to drift with the current.
The rationalist professedly takes reason as his guide. This, as will be shown, is just what lie does not do. He takes his own ignorance of God—the consequence of a fallen nature—as his stand, and attempts to use his power to reason—not his reason—to reduce all truth from God to the level of his own ignorance. At present we have only to do with it in result. The tendency of Rationalism is most certainly to refuse the authority of all Scripture, and it is only consistent when taking the position which is at least bolder and more honest, of denying all that is-divine in the person and work of Christ.
But if' the rationalist allows his fallen nature to govern his selfish reason, the ritualist lets the same nature, with its ignorance of God, govern his religious feelings: He knows he is owning facts when he owns religious instincts, and believes he is capable, beyond and in contrast to a brute, of knowing and appreciating truth that reveals God to him as his eternal portion. The rationalist knows religious instinct as a fact, too, but not knowing-God would make this the ground for degrading himself to animal responsibility, even if it be that of a "religious animal." Instincts unquestionably they are, and the ritualist has the truth in owning them. But in allowing himself to be governed by these instincts within, he again surrenders himself to his own heart, and is condemned of folly by the Scriptures.
Forms 'and ceremonies supposed to present divine truth, appeal strongly to these instincts; combining the attractiveness of worldly tastes and of religious superstitions. They may present ideas of the truth, but they cannot present the true fact. Sentiment may be cultivated and moved by such ideas, but not faith. Faith does not come by seeing or feeling but from hearing, and hearing from the Word of God.
The Scripture declares the true facts which are to be believed. The ceremony presents the shadow, and in the end the whole value of the substance is accredited to it. The finished work of Christ is not believed but denied, and the " Eucharist " becomes a perpetuation of it.
The tendency, then, at work in that which as yet bears the name of Christianity leads either to deny all that is divine in the work and worth of Christ or to attempt to borrow glory from it for man's own imitation and pageantry.
That which is common to both is confidence in that which is in man, and this either reduces the death of Christ upon the Cross to that of only a man, or else seeks to imitate and perpetuate it. And yet these two tendencies, which exert such powerful influence over the minds of men in the enlightened twentieth century, find as complete an exposure and condemnation. of their principles as is possible from one statement with reference to the offerings. A believer with the smallest intelligence can be warned by it, and a rationalist cannot fail to own the agreement. " Thou shalt not offer the blood of My sacrifice with leaven, neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning." Ex. 34:2525Thou shalt not offer the blood of my sacrifice with leaven; neither shall the sacrifice of the feast of the passover be left unto the morning. (Exodus 34:25).
Thus both the Rationalist's and the Ritualist's corrupt depreciation of the value of that sacrifice God had put His seal upon, is condemned, centuries prior to the event, as expressly as it subsequently is," When the most solemn warning is given against the tendency toward making "the blood of the covenant an unholy (ordinary) thing."
Thus, however inscrutable to man be the sources of such agreement, however marvelous or inexplicable the details of illustration may be, yet the Scriptures prove themselves capable of consistency with themselves and with divine truth. Their accord must be owned by the rationalist as well as by the believer, let him explain it how he will. Otherwise rationalism must feel itself on poor ground, if facts cannot be owned as they are found to be.
Evidence Both From Separate Examples and Also From the Purport of All.
Teachings wholly diverse in character have been given which confirm only the gospel and condemn popular views, but there is still more conclusive evidence that proves at once the divine source of the Scriptures and their divine truth.
The Scriptures are referred to, both by the Lord himself and by His Apostles, as a whole. Such they can only be, as having for their author one who has directed and perfected them as a whole. Whether they prove themselves this must wholly depend upon the sequence and completeness of the truth contained within them. If the Scriptures are taken first as they are and tested by what they claim to be, they must either, in fulfilling their own claim, prove themselves divine, or they stand convicted by their own contents of the falseness of such a claim. For Old Testament writings are given divine authority and divine purpose to testify of Him who was to come. Does the teaching in them point only to Him whom the Gospel in the New declares? The divisions into which they had been divided by the Jews, are found recognized in the New Testament writings. Luke 24:2727And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, he expounded unto them in all the scriptures the things concerning himself. (Luke 24:27). Acts 26:2222Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come: (Acts 26:22)
The Divisions in the Old Testament and the New, and Completeness of
THEIR TEACHING
They are divided into the Psalms, the Law, and the Prophets The teachings comprised under these titles certainly contain the truth necessary for a soul to know in order to wait for Him who was to come.
First man needs a revelation, so that he may learn what he is when the claims of God upon him are made known to him, and how he acts when he is responsible for having those claims pressed upon him. For this fully to be made known, there. must be the presenting of God's claims upon man in every possible way, and under every possible condition; and a true history of what man proves himself to be when thus tested.
This exactly answers to the subjects of books that may he placed under the bead of “The Law."
Secondly, man has to learn to need Him Who was to come. A history of exercise of the heart and conscience in having to do with God was needed. Man has more than action and words to his life, he has a heart and conscience, and the history that belongs to them is as much fact and as certain as that of actions and words, even if the history of the heart and conscience has never been written or even confessed. None are found able to honestly write one. So, at least, it has been publicly declared.
In the Scriptures a complete and honest confession of heart and conscience exercises is found, beginning at the first awakening of having to do with God, and ending with knowing needs that could only be satisfied in Him Who was to come, but which are fully satisfied in Him Who has come and Whom Scripture has. declared. Every exercise that heart or conscience can know before God finds its place in the division of the Psalms.
Thirdly, the last division declares its own purpose. There were writings extant before Christ came. They were professedly prophetic, and announced Him Who was to come. And the question has to be answered, Has part been so definitely fulfilled in Him as to give the divine assurance that that which is still unfulfilled will as certainly have an accomplishment?
Our inquiry then is, what is found as the result of teaching under these separate heads? Does it accord with the divine truths of the gospel and with them only?