THE
AUTHORSHIP AND CREDIBILITY OF THE BIBLE.
While
the Bible is generally accepted by Christian people as of
divine authority, comparatively few are able to clearly
state just why they so esteem it. The internal evidence
of its truthfulness, and its grandeur of doctrine, are the
principal evidences on which its testimony is, and should
be, generally received; and truly these are strong, and
convincing of its divine authorship and authority; yet the
man of God who would be thoroughly furnished with the truth,
and armed against every attack of skepticism, should endeavor
to know all he can of the time, manner, circumstances, etc.,
under which it was written; whether it has been preserved
free from corruption; and whether in its present condition
it is worthy of full confidence. Let us, therefore, briefly
consider what testimony we have to the credibility of the
Sacred Writings. From numerous expressions, references and
quotations in the New Testament by our Lord and the apostles
it is evident that a certain body of writings was at that
time considered to be of divine authority. The Sacred Scriptures
then in existence are now characterized as the Old Testament
Scriptures (the Scriptures of the Old or Law Covenant),
while that which was added by our Lord and the apostles
is termed the New Testament (the New Covenant) Scriptures.
No other book which the world has ever known has such a
history as the Bible. Its origin and authorship, its antiquity,
its wonderful preservation in the midst of the unparalleled
and continuous opposition which sought to destroy it, as
well as its diversity and teaching, make the Bible the most
wonderful book in existence. It is a collection composed
of sixty-six separate books, written by about forty different
writers, living centuries apart, speaking different languages,
subjects of different governments, and brought up under
different civilizations. Over 1500 years elapsed between
the writings of Moses and of John. As no other reliable
history dates so far back as the Bible, we are obliged to
look mainly to its own internal evidence, as to its origin,
authorship, and the reason for its existence, and indeed
for its credibility in every respect; and further, we should
look for such corroboration of its statements as reason,
its own harmony with itself, and with other known facts,
and subsequent developments furnish. And indeed this is
the evidence of reliability on which all history must rest.
To such evidence we are indebted for all our knowledge of
past events and of all present events as well, except such
as come under our own immediate observation. He who would
cast away Bible history as unworthy of credence, must on
the same ground reject all history; and to be entirely consistent,
must believe nothing which does not come under his own personal
observation. If its statements, thoroughly understood, are
contradictory, or are colored by prejudice, or are proven
untrue by a positive scientific knowledge, or if subsequent
developments prove its predictions untrue, and thereby show
the ignorance or dishonesty of the authors of the Bible,
then we may reasonably conclude that the entire book is
unworthy of confidence, and should reject it. But if, on
the contrary, we find that a thorough understanding of the
Bible, according to its own rules of interpretation, shows
its statements to be in harmony with each other; if it bears
no evidence of prejudicial coloring; if many of its prophecies
have actually come true, and others admit of future fulfillment;
if the integrity of its writers is manifested by unvarnished
records, then we have reason to believe the book. Its entire
testimony, historic, prophetic, and doctrinal, stands or
falls together. Science is yet in its infancy, yet in so
far as positive scientific knowledge has been attained,
it should and does corroborate the Bible testimony.
INTERNAL
EVIDENCES.
Those
who will make a study of the Bible plan will be fully convinced
of the conclusive evidence of the credibility of the Sacred
Scriptures, which is furnished in the purity, harmony and
grandeur of its teachings. Outside of the Scriptures we
have nowhere to look for an account of the circumstances
and motives of the earliest writers: but they furnish these
items of information themselves, and their integrity and
evident truthfulness in other matters is a sufficient guarantee
of truthfulness in these. Our first definite information
with reference to the Sacred Writings is afforded by the
direction given to Moses to write the law and history in
a book, and put it in the side of the ark for preservation.
(See Exod. 17:14; 34:27; Deut. 31:9-26.) This book was left
for the guidance of the people. Additions were made to it
from time to time by subsequent writers, and in the days
of the kings, scribes appear to have been appointed whose
business it was to keep a careful record of the important
events occurring in Jewish history, which records--Samuel,
Kings, Chronicles --were preserved and subsequently incorporated
with the Law. The prophets also did not confine themselves
to oral teaching, but wrote and in some cases had scribes
to record their teachings. (See, Josh. 1:8; 24:26; 1 Sam.
10:25; 1 Chron. 27:32; 29:29,30; 2 Chron. 33:18,19; Isa.
30:8; Jer. 30:2; 36:2; 45:1; 51:60.) As a result we have
the Old Testament Scriptures, composed of history, prophecy
and law, written by divine direction, as these citations
and also Paul's testimony (2 Tim. 3:15,16) prove. These
writings collectively were termed "The Law and The
Prophets," and the Hebrews were taught of God to esteem
them of divine authority and authorship, the writers being
merely the agents through whom they received them. They
were so taught to esteem them, by the miraculous dealings
of God with them as a people, in confirmation of his words
to them through the prophets, thus endorsing them as his
agents (See, Exod. 14:30,31; 19:9; 1 Kings 18:21,27,30,36,39);
and further by the establishment and enforcement of the
law as proclaimed and recorded by Moses. The political interests
and the religious veneration of the Israelites, under God's
immediate overruling and protection, combined to preserve
and protect these writings from contamination. Religiously,
they were rightfully regarded with the deepest veneration,
while politically they were the only guarantee which the
people possessed against despotism. The Jewish copyists
regarded these documents with great veneration. A very slight
error in copying often led them to destroy it and begin
anew. Josephus says that through all the ages that had passed
none had ventured to add to, take away from, or transpose,
aught of the Sacred Writings. In the degeneracy of the Jewish
nation, under the idolatrous administration of the successors
of Rehoboam, these Sacred Writings fell into disuse and
were almost forgotten, though they seem never to have been
taken from their place. In the reformation conducted by
Josiah, they were again brought to light. Again, in the
Babylonish captivity this book was lost sight of by the
Israelites, though it appears that they were accustomed
to meet together in little companies in Babylon to be instructed
by the scribes, who either taught the Law from memory or
from copies in their possession. On the restoration of the
Jews to Jerusalem, the Scriptures were again brought out,
and Ezra and his companions read the law to the people,
commenting upon and explaining it. (Neh. 8:1-8.) This public
reading of the Scriptures was the only means of keeping
them before the people, as printing was yet unknown and
the cost of a manuscript copy was beyond the reach of the
people, very few of whom could read. At the time of our
Lord's first advent, these O.T. Scriptures existed substantially
as we have them to-day, as to matter and arrangement. One
of the strongest evidences of the authenticity of the O.T.
Scriptures is found in the fact that the law and the prophets
were continually referred to by our Lord and the apostles
as authority, and that while the Lord denounced the corruptions
of the Jewish Church, and their traditions, by which they
made void the Word of God, he did not even intimate any
corruption in these Sacred Writings, but commends them,
and refers to and quotes them in proof of his claims. In
fact, the various parts of the entire book are bound together
by the mutual endorsement of the various writers, so that
to reject one is to mar the completeness of the whole. Each
book bears its own witness and stands on its own evidence
of credibility, and yet each book is linked with all the
rest, both by their common spirit and harmony and by their
mutual endorsement. Mark, for instance, the endorsement
of the account of creation in the commandment of the law
concerning the Sabbath day.--Exod. 20:11. Also compare Deut.
23:4,5; Joshua 24:9; Micah. 6:5; 2 Pet. 2:15; Jude 11-13;
Isa. 28:21; Hab. 3:11; Matt. 12:40.
THE
NEW TESTAMENT.
The
earliest copy of the New Testament known is written in the
Syriac language. Its date is estimated to be about the year
A.D. 100. And even at that early date it contained the same
books as at present with the exception of the Second Epistle
of Peter, the Third Epistle of John, Jude and the Book of
Revelation. And these omitted books we know were written
about the close of the first century, and probably had not
been widely circulated among the Christian congregations
at that time. All the books of the Old and New Testaments
as we now have them appear, however, in the Greek, in the
Sinaitic Manuscript, the oldest known Greek MS., whose date
is about A.D. 350. The first five books of the N.T. are
historical, and present a clear and connected account of
the life, character, circumstances, teachings and doings
of Jesus of Nazareth, who claimed to be the Messiah promised
in the O.T. Scriptures, and who fully substantiated his
claim. The four accounts of the Evangelists, though they
differ in phraseology, are in harmony in their statements,
some important items being recorded by each which seem to
have been overlooked by the others. These Evangelists testified
to that of which they had positive knowledge. The Apostle
John says: That which we have seen and heard declare we
unto you--"that which was from the beginning (the beginning
of the Lord's ministry), which we have heard, which we have
seen with our eyes, which we have looked upon, and our hands
have handled of the Word of life; for the life was manifested,
and we have seen it, and bear witness." (1 John 1:1-
3.) They testify also that they saw Christ after his resurrection.
The fifth book presents a valuable account of the doings
of the Apostles after their anointing with the Holy Spirit,
of the establishment of the Christian Church, and of the
first preaching of the good news to the Gentiles. The Apostolic
Epistles were written to the various local congregations
or churches, and were directed to be publicly read, and
to be exchanged among the churches; and the same authority
was claimed for them by their writers as that which was
accorded to the O.T. Scriptures. (1 Thes. 5:27; Col. 4:16;
2 Pet. 3:2,15,16; Heb. 1:1,2 and 2:1-4.) These letters and
the five historical books were carefully preserved by the
different congregations, and were appealed to as authority
in matters of doctrine. The letters of the apostles, claiming,
as they did, divine authority equal to that of the O.T.
Scriptures, were treasured and guarded with special care
by the various congregations of the early church. The New
Testament was completed by the Book of The Revelation, about
the close of the first century A.D., after which, these
epistles, etc., began to be collected for more permanent
preservation. The original copies of both the Old and New
Testaments have, of course, long since disappeared, and
the oldest manuscript (the Sinaitic) is reckoned to have
been written about three centuries after the death of Christ.
Those of earlier date were either destroyed in the persecutions
under which the church suffered, or were worn out by use.
These oldest manuscripts are preserved with great care in
the Museums and Libraries of Europe. During the Middle Ages,
when ignorance and corruption prevailed and the Bible was
hidden in monasteries away from the people, God was still
carrying on his work, preserving the Scriptures from destruction
even in the midst of Satan's stronghold, the apostate Church
of Rome. A favorite occupation of the monks during the Middle
Ages was the copying of the manuscripts of the N.T., which
were esteemed as relics more than as God's living authoritative
Word;--just as you will find in the parlor of very many
worldly people handsome Bibles, which are seldom opened.
Of these manuscripts there are said to be now more than
two thousand, of various dates from the fourth to the fifteenth
centuries. The quiet seclusion of those monks gave them
special opportunities for careful copying, and years were
sometimes spent in the copying of a single manuscript.
RELIABILITY
OF PRESENT TRANSLATIONS.
The
idea exists in some minds that during the lapse of centuries
the Scriptures have become largely corrupted, and therefore
a very uncertain foundation for faith. They reason that
this is surely to be expected of a book which has survived
so many centuries, and which has been claimed as divine
authority by so many different factions, and which can be
read by the majority only from translations, made by somewhat
biased translators. And the late revisions of the book are
supposed to be an acknowledgment of the supposed fact. Those,
however, who are acquainted with the manner in which the
ancient manuscripts of the Scriptures have been preserved
for centuries, carefully copied, diligently compared and
translated by pious and learned linguists, whose work was
thereafter subjected to the most learned and scrutinizing
criticism of an age in which scholars are by no means few,
are prepared to see that such an idea is by no means a correct
or reasonable one, though to the uninformed it may appear
so. It is a fact that the Scriptures, as we find them to-day,
bear internal evidence of their original purity; and ample
means, both internal and external, are now furnished so
that the careful student may detect any error which might
have crept in either by fraud or accident. While there are
some errors in translation and a few interpolations in our
common English translation, on the whole it is acknowledged
by scholars to be a remarkably good transcript of the Sacred
Word. Before the invention of printing, the copying of the
Scriptures, being very slow and tedious, involved considerable
liability to error in transcribing, such as the accidental
omission of a word or paragraph, the substitution of one
word for another, or the misunderstanding of a word where
the copyist wrote from the dictation of another person.
And again, sometimes a marginal note might be mistaken for
a part of the text and copied in as such. But while a very
few errors have crept in, in such ways, and a few others
seem to have been designedly inserted, various circumstances
have been at work, both to preserve the integrity of the
Sacred Writings, and also to make manifest any errors which
have crept into them. Very early in the Christian Era translations
of the New Testament Scriptures were made into several languages,
and the different factions that early developed and continued
to exist, though they might have been desirous of adding
to or taking from the original text in order to give their
claims a show of Scriptural support, were watched by each
other to see that they did not do so, and had they succeeded
in corrupting the text in one language, another translation
would make it manifest. Even the Douay translation, in use
in the Romish church, is in most respects substantially
the same as the King James translation. The fact that during
the "dark ages" the Scriptures were practically
cast aside, being supplanted by the decrees of popes and
councils, so that its teachings had no influence upon the
masses of the people who did not have copies in their possession--nor
could they have read them if they had them-- doubtless made
unnecessary the serious alteration of the text, at a time
when bold, bad men had abundant power to do so. For men
who would plot treason, incite to wars and commit murders
for the advancement of the papal hierarchy, as we know was
done, would have been bold enough for anything. Thus the
depth of ignorance in the dark ages served to protect and
keep pure God's Word, so that its clear light has shone
specially at the two ends of the Gospel age. (1 Cor. 10:11.)
The few interpolations which were dared, in support of the
false claims of Papacy, were made just as the gloom of the
"dark ages" was closing in upon mankind, and are
now made glaringly manifest, from their lack of harmony
with the context, their antagonism with other scriptures
and from their absence in the oldest and most complete and
reliable manuscripts.
RELATIVE
VALUES OF ANCIENT MANUSCRIPTS.
As
to the relative values of ancient manuscripts, we quote
the following comments from the pen of that eminent German
scholar, Constantine Tischendorf, who spent many years of
his life in diligently searching out and comparing the various
ancient manuscripts and translations of the Scriptures in
many languages, and who has furnished to the church the
results of his investigation in a careful exhibit of the
various departures of the English Authorized Version of
the New Testament from the three oldest and most important
manuscripts. Mr. Tischendorf says: "As early as the
reign of Elizabeth the English nation possessed an authorized
translation, executed by the Bishops under the guidance
of Archbishop Parker; and this, half a century later, in
the year 1611, was revised at the command of James the First
by a body of learned divines, and became the present 'Authorized
Version.' Founded as it was on the Greek text at that time
accepted by Protestant theologians, and translated with
scholarship and conscientious care, this version of the
New Testament has deservedly become an object of great reverence,
and a truly national treasure to the English Church. The
German Church alone possesses in Luther's New Testament
a treasure of similar value.... "The Authorized Version,
like Luther's, was made from a Greek text which Erasmus
in 1516, and Robert Stephens in 1550, had formed from manuscripts
of later date than the tenth century. Whether those manuscripts
were thoroughly trustworthy --in other words, whether they
exhibited the Apostolic original as perfectly as possible--has
long been matter of diligent and learned investigation.
Since the sixteenth century Greek manuscripts have been
discovered of far greater antiquity than those of Erasmus
and Stephens; as well as others in Latin, Syriac, Coptic,
and Gothic, into which languages the sacred text was translated
between the second and fourth centuries; while in the works
of the Fathers, from the second century downwards, many
quotations from the New Testament have been found and compared....One
thing is agreed upon by the majority of those who understand
the subject, namely, that the oldest copies approach the
original text more nearly than the later ones. "Providence
has ordained for the New Testament more sources of the greatest
antiquity than are possessed by all the old Greek literature
put together. And of these, two manuscripts have for long
been especially esteemed by Christian scholars, since, in
addition to their great antiquity, they contain very nearly
the whole of both the Old and New Testaments. Of these two,
one is deposited in the Vatican, and the other in the British
Museum. Within the last ten years a third has been added
to the number, which was found at Mount Sinai, and is now
at St. Petersburg. These three manuscripts undoubtedly stand
at the head of all the ancient copies of the New Testament,
and it is by their standard that both the early editions
of the Greek text and the modern versions are to be compared
and corrected. "The effect of comparing the common
English text with the most ancient authorities will be as
often to disclose agreement as disagreement. True, the three
great manuscripts alluded to differ from each other both
in age and authority, and no one of them can be said to
stand so high that its sole verdict is sufficient to silence
all contradiction. But to treat such ancient authorities
with neglect would be either unwarrantable arrogance or
culpable negligence; and it would be indeed a misunderstanding
of the dealings of Providence, if after these documents
had been preserved through all the dangers of fourteen or
fifteen centuries, and delivered safe into our hands, we
were not to receive them with thankfulness as the most valuable
instruments for the elucidation of truth. "It may be
urged that our undertaking is opposed to true reverence;
and that by thus exposing the inaccuracies of the English
Version, we shall bring discredit upon a work which has
been for centuries the object of love and veneration both
in public and private. But those who would stigmatize the
process of scientific criticism and test, which we propose,
as irreverent, are greatly mistaken. To us the most reverential
course appears to be, to accept nothing as the Word of God
which is not proved to be so by the evidence of the oldest,
and therefore most certain, witnesses that he has put into
our hands. With this in view, and with this intention, the
writer has occupied himself for thirty years past, in searching
not only the Libraries of Europe, but the obscurest convents
of the East, both in Africa and Asia, for the most ancient
manuscript, of the Bible; and has done all in his power
to collect the most important of such documents, to arrange
them and to publish them for the benefit both of the present
age and of posterity, so as to settle the original text
of the sacred writers on the basis of the most careful investigation.
"The first of these great manuscripts already referred
to which came into possession of Europe was the Vatican
Codex. Whence it was acquired by the Vatican Library is
not known; but it appears in the first catalogue of that
collection which dates from the year 1475. The manuscript
embraces both the Old and New Testaments. Of the later it
contains the four Gospels, the Acts, the seven Catholic
Epistles, nine of the Pauline Epistles, and the Epistle
to the Hebrews as far as 9:14, from which verse to the end
of the New Testament it is deficient; so that not only the
last chapters of Hebrews, but the Epistle to Timothy, Titus
and Philemon, as well as the Revelation, are missing. The
peculiarities of the writing, the arrangement of the manuscript,
and the character of the text--especially certain very remarkable
readings--all combine to place the execution of the Codex
in the fourth century, possibly about the middle of it.
"The Alexandrine Codex was presented to King Charles
the First in 1628 by Cyril Lucar, Patriarch of Constantinople,
who had himself brought it from Alexandria, of which place
he was formerly Patriarch, and whence it derives its name.
It contains both the Old and New Testaments. Of the New
the following passages are wanting:--Matt. 1:1 to 25:6;
John 6:50 to 8:52; 2 Cor. 4:13 to 12:6. ...It would appear
to have been written about the middle of the fifth century.
"The Sinaitic Codex I was myself so happy as to discover
in 1844 and 1859, at the convent of St. Catherine, on Mount
Sinai, in the later of which years I brought it to Russia
to the Emperor Alexander the Second, at whose instance my
second journey to the East was undertaken. It contains both
Old and New Testaments --the latter perfect without the
loss of a single leaf....All the considerations which tend
to fix the date of manuscripts lead to the conclusion that
the Sinaitic Codex belongs to the middle of the fourth century.
Indeed, the evidence is clearer in this case than in that
of the Vatican Codex; and it is not improbable (which cannot
be the case with the Vatican MS.) that it is one of the
fifty copies which the Emperor Constantine in the year 331
directed to be made for Byzantium, under the care of Eusebius
of Caesarea. In this case it is a natural inference that
it was sent from Byzantium to the monks of St. Catherine
by the Emperor Justinian, the founder of the convent. The
entire Codex was published by its discoverer, under the
orders of the Emperor of Russia, in 1862, with the most
scrupulous exactness, and in a truly magnificent shape,
and the New Testament portion was issued in a portable form
in 1863 and 1865. "These considerations seem to show
that the first place among the three great manuscripts,
both for age and extent, is held by the Sinaitic Codex,
the second by the Vatican, and the third by the Alexandrine.
And this order is completely confirmed by the text they
exhibit, which is not merely that which was accepted in
the East at the time they were copied; but, having been
written by Alexandrine copyists who knew but little of Greek,
and therefore had no temptation to make alterations, they
remain in a high degree faithful to the text which was accepted
through a large portion of Christendom in the third and
second centuries. The proof of this is their agreement with
the most ancient translations--namely, the so-called Italic,
made in the second century in proconsular Africa; the Syriac
Gospels of the same date, now transferred from the convents
of the Nitrian desert to the British Museum; and the Coptic
version of the third century. It is confirmed also by their
agreement with the oldest of the Fathers, such as Irenaeus,
Tertullian, Clement and Origen. "These remarks apply
to the Sinaitic Codex--which is remarkably close in its
agreement to the 'Italic' version--more than they do to
the Vatican MS., and still more so than the Alexandrine,
which, however, is of far more value in the Acts, Epistles
and Apocalypse than it is in the Gospels.... "No single
work of ancient Greek classical literature can command three
such original witnesses as the Sinaitic, Vatican the integrity
and accuracy of its text. That they are available in the
case of a book which is at once the most sacred and the
most important in the world is surely matter for the deepest
thankfulness to God."
OTHER
MEANS OF VERIFICATION.
Another
remarkable means for preserving and verifying the New Testament
writings is their copious quotation in other writings. Origen,
who wrote in the early part of the third century, quotes
5745 passages from all the books in the New Testament; Tertullian
(A.D. 200) makes more than 3000 quotations from the N.T.
books; Clement (A.D. 194) quotes 380 passages; Irenaeus
(A.D. 178) quotes 767 passages; Polycarp, who was martyred
A.D. 165, after serving Christ 86 years, quoted 36 passages
in a single epistle; Justin Martyr (A.D. 140) also quotes
from the N.T. These were all Christian writers; and in addition
to these, the Scriptures were largely quoted by heathen
and infidel writers, among them Celsus (A.D. 150) and Porphyry
(A.D. 304). Indeed the entire New Testament, with the exception
of about a dozen verses, has been found scattered as quotations
through various writings that are still extant. And if every
copy of the N.T. had been destroyed by its enemies, the
book could have been reproduced from these quotations contained
in the writings of the early Christians and their enemies.
While the means for the preservation of the Scriptures have
been thus remarkably complete, and in view of the unparalleled
opposition with which they have met give evidence of Divine
care in their preservation, the means for their verification,
and for arriving at an understanding of them in God's due
time, are found to be none the less remarkable. No other
book in the world has ever had such attention as this book.
The labor that has been spent in the preparation of complete
concordances, indexes, various translations, etc., has been
enormous; and the results to students of the Bible are of
incalculable value. And while we recognize the providence
of God in all this, we should and do appreciate these labors
of his children and their great service to us, though we
utterly repudiate, as useless, the labor that has been spent
on many so-called theological writings, which are nothing
more than miserable efforts to support the vain traditions
of men, the accumulated monstrous volumes of which would
indeed form a monument of human folly. Just in "The
Time of the End," when the prophet (Dan. 12:9,10) declares
that "the wise (the meek and faithful children of God)
shall understand," we find these wonderful aids coming
forward to our assistance. And parallel with these has happened
the general spread of intelligence and education and the
placing of the Bible in the hands of the people, thus enabling
them to use the helps provided. In view of these things,
our only reasonable conclusion must be, that this wonderful
book has been completely under Divine supervision in its
preparation, and in its gradual and seasonable unfolding
to the understanding; and yet it has all been accomplished
through human agency. Those who are too careless, or too
indifferent, or who permit themselves to be too much engrossed
with the cares of this life to give it a studious examination,
should not be expected to comprehend its weight of authority,
and its full evidence of credibility. We are aware of the
fact that in these days when the art of printing has flooded
the world with literature of every description, good, bad,
and indifferent, one might reasonably reply, We cannot examine
everything. Very true, but this book has a claim superior
to that of any other book in the world, and no man is as
justifiable in laying it upon the shelf, as he would be
in doing with the Koran or the Vedas. The very existence
of such a book, animated with such a spirit of justice,
wisdom, love and power, and disclosing such good tidings
of great joy to all people, having such a history and authorship,
and containing such varied information--historic, scientific,
and moral; and so remarkably preserved for so many centuries,
though so violently opposed, is sufficient to awaken at
least a suspicion of its value, and to claim the attention
and investigation of every reasoning mind. The claims of
this book upon our attention are by far superior to those
of any other, and these reasonable claims appear on its
very surface, while every systematic and properly directed
effort at investigation rewards the diligent student with
copious and abundant proof, both of its truthfulness and
of its value.
THE
INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE.
The
Bible claims to be a book written under divine inspiration.
The word inspire signifies to breathe in, to infuse, to
fill, to inhale--as to inspire the lungs with air. (See
Webster's Dictionary.) Hence, when it is said that certain
scriptures, or writings of godly men, were given by inspiration
of God (2 Tim. 3:16), it signifies that those men were in
some way, whether through miraculous or natural means, inspired
by, or brought under the influence of God; so as to be used
by him in speaking or writing such words as he wished to
have expressed. The prophets and apostles all claimed such
inspiration. Peter says, "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 Spirit."--2 Pet. 1:21.
Through Moses we have the law of God and the only existing
credible history of mankind from the creation of Adam down
to his own time, covering a period of about 2500 years.
While Moses and the other Bible writers were holy men, inspired
with pure motives and holy zeal, and while personal pride,
ambition, etc., were no part of their spirit, we learn that
Moses was inspired with the knowledge of God's law, both
in its great principles and also in the minutiae of its
typical ceremonials, by direct revelation from God at Mount
Sinai, and of some points of duty at the burning bush at
Horeb, etc. As for his historical writings, Moses was evidently
guided of God in the collation and presentation in its present
complete and connected form of the history of the world
down to his day, which was really in great part the history
of his own family back to Adam with an account of the creation
doubtless given by God to Adam while he was yet in fellowship
in Eden. Nor does a correct handing down of family information,
covering a period of over 2300 years, seem impossible, or
liable, as it would now be, to have become polluted; for,
aside from the fact that it was handed down through the
God-fearing family line of Seth, it should be remembered
that at that time the bodies, brains and memories of men
were not so weak as they are now, and as they have been
since the flood; and finally, because the long lives of
two men link Adam with the family of Abraham, the family
of covenant favor,--with Isaac, the typical seed of promise.
These two men were Methuselah and Shem. Methuselah was over
200 years old when Adam died, and had abundant opportunity,
therefore, for information at first hands; and Shem, the
son of Noah, lived contemporaneously with Methuselah for
98 years, and with Isaac for 50 years. Thus, these two living,
God-fearing men acted as God's historians to communicate
his revelations and dealings to the family in whom centered
the promises, of which Moses was one of the prospective
heirs. In addition to these facts, we have the statement
of Josephus that Methuselah, Noah and Shem, the year before
the flood, inscribed the history and discoveries of the
world on two monuments of stone and brick which were still
standing in Moses' time. As for the writings of the prophets,
their devoted, godly lives attest their sincerity; their
lives were spent for God and in the defense of righteousness,
and not for gain and worldly honor. And as for proofs that
God acted through them and that they merely expressed his
messages, as Peter declares, it is to be found in the fulfillment
of their predictions. This brings us to the examination
of the inspiration of the New Testament. Of the four gospel
narratives and the book of the Acts of the Apostles, which
are merely historic narratives, it might with considerable
force be argued that no inspiration was necessary. But we
must remember that since it was God's will that the important
doings and teachings of our Lord and his disciples should
be handed down, for the information and guidance of his
Church throughout the age, it was necessary that God, even
while leaving the writers free to record those truths in
their own several styles of expression and arrangement,
should nevertheless exercise a supervision of his work.
To this end it would appear reasonable that he would cause
circumstances, etc., to call to the memory of one or another
of them items and details which, otherwise, in so condensed
an account of matters so important, would have been overlooked.
And this was no less the work of God's spirit, power, or
influence than the more noticeable and peculiar manifestations
through the prophets. The Apostle Peter tells us that the
prophets of old time often did not understand their own
utterances, as they themselves also acknowledge (1 Pet.
1:12; Dan. 12:4,8-10); and we should remember that the twelve
apostles (Paul taking the place of Judas--Gal. 1:17; 1 Tim.
2:7) not only filled the office of apostles --or specially
appointed teachers and expounders of the Gospel of the New
Covenant--but they also, especially Peter and Paul and John,
filled the office of prophets, and were not only given the
spirit of wisdom and understanding by which they were enabled
to understand and explain the previously dark prophecies,
but in addition to this we believe that they were under
the guidance and supervision of the Lord to such an extent
that their references to things future from their day, things
therefore not then due to be fully understood, were guided,
so as to be true to an extent far beyond their comprehension,
and such consequently were as really prophetic as the utterances
of the old-time prophets. Illustrations of this are to be
found in the Revelations of the Apostle John, in Peter's
symbolic description of the Day of the Lord (2 Pet. 3:10-13),
and in numerous references to the same period by Paul also,
among which were some things hard to be understood even
by Peter (2 Pet. 3:16) and only partially then by Paul himself.
The latter, however, was permitted to see future things
more clearly than others of his time, and to that end he
was given special visions and revelations which he was not
allowed to make known to others (2 Cor. 12:1-4), but which,
nevertheless, influenced and colored his subsequent teachings
and his epistles. And these very items which Peter thought
strange of, and called "hard to be understood,"
are the very items which now, in God's due time, for which
they were intended, so grandly illuminate not only Peter's
prophecies and John's Revelation, but the entire word and
plan of God, --that the man of God may be thoroughly furnished.--2
Tim. 3:16,17. That the early church considered the writings
and teachings of the apostles different from all others,
in authority, is manifest from the early arrangement of
these writings together and the keeping separate from these,
as apocryphal, other good writings of other good men. And
yet there were, even in the days of the apostles, ambitious
men who taught another gospel and claimed for themselves
the honors of special revelations and authority as apostles
and teachers of no less authority than the twelve apostles.
And ambitious men of the same sort have from time to time
since arisen-- Emanuel Swedenborg and many less able and
less notable--whose claims, if conceded, would not only
place them in rank far above Paul, the prince of the apostles,
but whose teachings would tend to discredit entirely, as
"old wives' fables," the whole story of redemption
and remission of sins through the blood of the cross. These
would-be apostles, boastful, heady, high-minded, have "another
gospel," a perversion of the gospel of Christ; and
above all they despise and seek to cast discredit upon the
words of Paul who so clearly, forcibly and logically lifts
up the standard of faith and points to the cross--the ransom--
as the sure foundation, and who so clearly showed that pseudo-apostles,
false apostles, would arise and deceive many. It not only
required an inspiration to write God's plan, but it also
requires an inspiration of the Almighty to give an understanding
of that revelation; yet this inspiration is of a different
sort. When any one has realized himself a sinner, weak,
imperfect and condemned, and has accepted of Christ as his
Redeemer, and full of love and appreciation has consecrated
his heart (his mind, his will) to the Lord, to henceforth
please not himself but his Redeemer,--God has arranged that
such a consecration of the natural mind brings a new mind.
It opens the way for the holy mind or will of God, expressed
through his written word, to be received; and as it is received
into such a good, honest, consecrated heart, it in-forms
that heart and opens the eyes of the understanding, so that
from the new standpoint (God's standpoint) many things wear
a very different aspect, and among other things the Scripture
teachings, which gradually open up as item after item of
the divine plan is fulfilled, and new features of the unfolding
plan become due to be understood, and from the new standpoint
appreciated and accepted. Just as with astronomers, the
close observation of facts and influences already recognized
often leads them to look in certain directions for hitherto
undiscovered planets, and they find them, so with the seekers
after spiritual truths; the clear appreciation and close
study of the known plan lead gradually, step by step, to
the discovery of other particulars, hitherto unnoticed,
each of which only adds to the beauty and harmony of the
truths previously seen. Thus it is that "The path of
the just is a shining light which shineth more and more
unto the perfect day." Of course the writings of all
such as have their wills fully subjected to the mind of
God, as revealed in his Word, must be also somewhat inspired
by God's spirit, received from his Word by their complete
subjection to its leading. The spirit of the truth inspires
and controls to a greater or lesser extent not only their
pens but their words and thoughts, and even their very looks.
Yet such an inspiration, common to all the saints, in proportion
to their development, should be critically distinguished
from the special and peculiarly guided and guarded inspiration
of the twelve apostles, whom God specially appointed to
be the teachers of the church, and who have no successors
in this office. Only twelve were "chosen," and
when one of these, Judas, fell from his honorable office,
the Lord in due time appointed Paul to the place; and he
not only has never recognized others, but clearly indicates
that he never will recognize others in that office.--Rev.
21:14. With the death of the Apostles the canon of Scripture
closed, because God had there given a full and complete
revelation of his plan for man's salvation; though some
of it was in a condensed form which has since expanded and
is expanding and unfolding and will continue to expand and
shine more and more until the perfect day--the Millennial
Day--has been fully ushered in. Paul expresses this thought
clearly when he declares that the Holy Scriptures are able
to make wise unto salvation, and that they are sufficient.
As we consider, then, the completeness, harmony, purity
and grandeur of the Bible, its age and wonderful preservation
through the wreck and storms of six thousand years, it must
be admitted to be a most wonderful book; and those who have
learned to read it understandingly, who see in it the great
plan of the ages, cannot doubt that God was its inspiring
Author, as well as its Preserver. Its only parallel is the
book of nature by the same great Author.