The Methodist Quarterly Review
1852

The Inspiration of the Holy Scriptures; its Nature and Proof. Eight Discourses preached before the University of Dublin, by William Lee, M. A. New York: Robert Carter & Brothers, 1857.

ATTENTIVE observers have, for some time past, seen indications of an awakening of the public mind, relative to the dogma of "Inspiration." A re-examination of the whole subject, and a re-statement of its evidences, seem to be demanded; and this, very possibly, may Tender necessary certain modifications of its positions. On the European Continent, our Teutonic kinsmen and fellow-Protestants have been discussing the subject for half a century, and it is well known that whatever subject occupies their patient attention and study, their discussions are at length reproduced among us; though usually in a modified and mitigated form. That the free discussion of this subject should awaken a lively public interest is certainly not strange; the matters in question are too great and the opinions to be reviewed too venerable to allow the subject to be opened with-out arousing a lively interest in the Church. Still we see no cause for apprehending any such conflict of opinions as would seriously interrupt the peace of Evangelical Protestantism, or at all endanger the stability of the foundations of the faith.

The first signs of the indicated movement appeared in the form of disquisitions designed to strengthen the old positions and maintain the landmarks of a hyper-orthodoxy. In these we were served with treatises and discussions, varying in extent from fugitive essays to stately volumes, asserting in the boldest, and sometimes in the baldest style, a verbal inspiration of the Scriptures, at once mechanical and non-rational; and this theory has been eliminated and amplified to the last details of the subject. A little later, as to the commencement, but mostly cotemporaneously as to its progress was seen a counter movement, resulting in the production of a mass of crude neological and rationalistic discussions, presenting certain specious though really antiquated objections to the whole doctrine of inspiration, maintained from both philosophical and theological stand-points. The third stage of this movement is now passing before us. The necessity of reviewing the whole subject is conceded, and men whose orthodoxy is beyond suspicion, and whose piety and learning give much authority to their opinions, are ready to declare,. that while their confidence in the Bible as a record of the Divine counsels is undiminished, they find it impossible to defend their opinions by the arguments most relied on, or to adopt the theories of inspiration hitherto chiefly in vogue.

The volume whose title stands at the head of this paper, is among the early fruits of this new phase of the public thought, and it bears in itself clear indications of the influences which gave it being. It is evidently the production of a writer of respectable erudition, and of an eminently conservative turn of mind. By virtue of the former he finds himself compelled to abandon the old mechanical theory of a verbal inspiration, as quite untenable; but though thus cut loose Thorn his traditional moorings, his constitutional conservatism effectually restrains him from falling to the other extreme, as is often the case with theological reformers. It might be difficult to give in detail his own theory, should we attempt it, since, if we do not mistake the matter, he has not fully developed a theory; and even in what he has written, the several parts seem to be but imperfectly adjusted. Probably these are only his first thoughts, vigorous, indeed, but crude, which time and further study will mature. At some future time, (for he will surely, write again,) we shall see him more satisfactorily developing his system, and both fortifying and illustrating his opinions. The present volume, meanwhile, will serve a good purpose pro tempore; but because it belongs to a transition period in the history of its subject, as well as on account of its intrinsic imperfections, it cannot continue long; nor will it hereafter serve any other valuable purpose than to mark the transitions of the prevailing opinion for the time being

As we shall probably have but little occasion to notice the book particularly in our further remarks, we may as well at this point say whatever maybe needful to give the reader a general notion of its character. The volume, an octavo of six hundred and seventy-eight pages, is made up of eight lectures, headed severally: 1. The Question Stated-2. The Immemorial Doctrine of the Church of God-3. The Old Testament and the New-the Logos the Revealer-4. Revelation and Inspiration-5. Revelation and Inspiration (continued)-6. Scriptural Proof-7. The Commission to write-Form of what was written-8. Recapitulation, Objections Considered: illustrated with numerous and rather extensive foot-notes, principally citations from ancient Christian authorities, and a long list of appendixes, of much the same character. The argumentation is learned and generally logical; hut the style is heavy and the method somewhat confused, and the whole work is deficient in clearness and vivacity. The book is a perfectly safe one, soundly orthodox, and yet sufficiently progressive to save it from the charge of stubborn conservatism; but unless the reader brings to its perusal either a lively interest in the subject, or an unusually large share of patience, he will scarcely reach the last page. In our further remarks we shall refer to it, as may be convenient to illustrate the points of our own discussion, without assenting to its conclusions further than we explicitly indorse them, nor yet in any case pretending to hold the author responsible for the use we may make of his positions and arguments.

The connection of a confidence in the Scriptures, not very widely different from that commonly entertained, with all that is really valuable in religion,. is more intimate than is often suspected. Though merely speculative theism is no part of religion, yet it is among its essential conditions; for in order to the worship of God, he must be known. It is also sufficiently proved, as matter of fact, that this necessary knowledge can be attained only by the aid of revelation; and further, that among all pretended revelations no other can be found at all deserving attention, except those recorded in the Bible. The whole question is thus narrowed down to the two alternatives; the recognition of the Divinity of the Scriptures, and the negation, or rather the ignoring of all religion. True, there are those who hesitate to accept either of these alternatives, but we think unwisely, and the common convictions of mankind seem to be steadily and rapidly subsiding in this position. Advocates of religion are more and more generally agreeing to recognize the Bible as the record of certain Divine communications to our race, so attested as to entitle them to command their convictions and dictate their conduct. Here there is substantial unanimity. Beyond this there may be, among the same persons, very wide discrepances, both as to modes of interpretation, and the precise sense of the enunciations, as to which men may hold either part, consistently with the profession of the Christian name.

In conceding this authority to the Bible, two points are assumed:

first, that God has in some way communicated to mankind certain truths and doctrines, which could have been gained by no other means; and, secondly, that he at first authenticated these revelations as given by himself, and afterward the record of them as correct and inspired. The first implies the Divine origin of the matter of the Bible, and the fact that certain persons have been made media of communication between the Divine and the human intelligences. The second recognizes a providential superintendence of the imparted revelations, so as to secure their faithful transmission with all requisite credentials to other persons and to future times. These two are the essential elements of a belief in the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures; where they are found, though they allow ample verge for differences as to specific points, we are compelled in all fairness to confess the fundamental soundness of their professors; where these are not found, though there may be large pretensions to a reverence for the Bible, yet there must be an entire want of reliance upon it as the word of God, and the sole and sufficient rule of life. Both of these points are also necessarily included in any adequate notion of the inspiration of the Scriptures; since in this Divine interference that inspiration consists.

The term "inspiration," which has been chosen by common consent to express the Divine agency in the Scriptures, is among the most unfortunately ambiguous in our language, and probably has contributed not a little to the prevalent misunderstanding of the subject. Any degree of mental elevation, occasioned only by natural causes, and induced upon the mind in its normal state, is styled an inspiration. This is the inspiration of poets and orators, the enthusiasm of genius, the lofty power of awakened thought. But all this has nothing to do with either receiving or recording a Divine revelation, and is therefore quite another thing than the inspiration of the Bible. That inspiration includes the gift of certain intellectual convictions by means outside of the usual processes of intellection, and their embodiment in such forms of words as will effectually render them intelligible to all other minds. We may therefore, in considering the question of the inspiration of the Scriptures, entirely dismiss this first sense of the term; for though we would not deny that the sacred writers may have been largely the subjects of this merely human inspiration, yet this was not their inspiration, as writers of the sacred books.

Confining our attention to that species of inspiration which belongs exclusively to the Bible, we find occasion for a further discrimination. By one form of inspiration the prophets "saw the vision of the Almighty," and by quite another "holy men wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." By the former the intellects of inspired men became possessed of certain truths derived directly from the Divine intelligence; by the latter the mind of the sacred penman was elevated to the requisite point, and such directions given to his will and purposes, as to secure from him a faithful transcript of the Divinely imparted truths. This distinction is very fully discussed in the volume before us, and it is made to solve many of the difficulties which have beset the subject. To that form of Divine influence by which truth is conveyed from the Divine to the human mind, the author gives the specific name of "Revelation," and attempts to confine the use of the general term to only the other species of inspiration. Could a distinct word be found for this species also, and the generic term "inspiration" be left in its generic sense exclusively, the nomenclature would be more complete and definite; though such a definite use of terms is perhaps too little sustained by usage to warrant its adoption.

The distinction of these two species of inspiration may be further elucidated by considering their relations to the persons of the adorable Trinity. To declare the will of God to mankind is the peculiar office of God the Son, who is for that reason called the Logos, "the Light of the world," and "the express image of the Father's person." It is he whom we recognize speaking to patriarchs and prophets. He was ever the angel of the Divine presence, with Abraham, with Israel, and with Moses. He shone in the light of the Shekinah visibly, and in the symbols of the ritual more darkly and yet more instructively, preparing the chosen people for the more full and glorious manifestation of the truth, which he gave at length, in his own incarnate person. To him, in his distinctive personality, has the Church steadily ascribed the office of imparting to men the glorious counsels of the Father. But as Christ's work is rather for us, than in us, so this revelation was in all cases, as to its recipients, abnormal, objective, and supernatural; addressed rather to his perceptions than to his sensibilities, and increasing his knowledge, but not immediately modifying his character. It was also of definite extent, both as to its matter and its duration, and accordingly the mission of the Son, as the revealer, was long since fulfilled and terminated.

But when infinite Wisdom had given to our race a revelation of his purposes, it was further needful to provide for the faithful custody and diffusion of the revelation so given. it was no less import-ant that it should be recorded with infallible correctness, and that tine record should be certainly ascertained to be the truth of God, than that it should be at first properly certified to have come forth from God. This work pertains to the office of the Holy Ghost, the Divine Comforter, of whom the Saviour himself said, "lie shall glorify me, for he shall receive of mine and shall show it unto you." It was by his inspiration that the mind of the sacred penman was raised to the holy elevation required for the work committed to him. By his illumination and direction the sacred scribe was enabled to separate the precious word from all earthly ad-mixtures, and to embody the truth of God in symmetrical completeness; and as the indwelling Spirit of the Church, he has kept that word in its purity and Divine efficiency among all the mutations of human affairs. His office in this matter is, therefore, specific and unique; at once clearly distinguished from the act of imparting revelation, and yet in no less degree requiring the divine agency. And though the fact that the Word and Spirit co-operate in the production of the holy writings may cause an apparent blending of their offices, their distinctness must appear to every attentive observer. The Son is the exclusive giver of revelation; the Spirit prepares the heart of the prophet to receive the truth, and guides the hand appointed to record it; He also becomes its expounder, in order, through its instrumentality, to reprove the world and to sanctify the Church.

Before proceeding to consider the question of inspiration, in its specific sense, a fuller examination of the work of revealing, especially in its relation to the recipient, may be proper. if, as we have assumed, God converses directly with human intelligences, and originates convictions in men's understandings, it is certainly pertinent to a just determination of the subject, and altogether worthy of the pains, to examine the phenomena of that process. in this discussion, the first inquiry relates to what may be called "the prophetic state," the mental condition of the receiver of a revelation at the instant of its reception; whether this occurs while the mind is in its ordinary normal condition, or only in ecstasy, with the senses closed, and an abnormal consciousness existing instead of a rational perception. The possibility of both of these will not be denied; indeed, the actual occurrence of both as matters of fact in the history of prophecy, will hardly admit of a question. The visions and dreams of the prophets, whether supervening after the senses were closed by natural sleep, or by the more violent interposition of the Divine hand in casting the prophet into a state of trance, are evidently of this character. The ecstasy, though it has been claimed by Hengstenberg and others, as the exclusive method of direct revelation, was probably the least frequently employed of all its various modes. A few remarkable cases are given; remarkable alike for their in-frequency and their awful grandeur; but the whole of them constitute but a very small proportion of the sum of Divine revelation. "Visions of the night," which differed only in their accidents from the revelations made in ecstasy, the internal abnormal perception being induced, not by arresting and subjecting the natural mental processes, but by causing them to occupy the vacuity of thought occasioned by sleep, were evidently much more frequent; and yet even they were not the means chiefly used for communicating a knowledge of the Divine will.

The distinction of the two points embraced in every completed revelation is happily illustrated by several of the most remarkable cases of this method of communication. Pharaoh's dream contained a revelation; but he was unable to understand its import, till a further revelation, made to another person, disclosed it. The prophet Daniel saw the vision of the "ram and he-goat" with all needful distinctness, but wholly failed to understand the meaning of it, until a second and much plainer revelation was given. To the child Samuel was made a most manifest revelation from God, but he did not recognize it as such till further instructed in the matter. For the most part the evidence of their Divine origin accompanied the communication given; but not invariably. Many expressions found in the Old Testament, of whose prophetic character there is great reason to presume the writers of them were not aware, are, in the New Testament, shown to have been of that character. And, to cite but a single instance from the New Testament, that striking expression of Caiaphas respecting the necessity of the death of Christ, to his own mind appeared only as a maxim of governmental policy,. though it was evidently a highly evangelical prophecy. A completed revelation must first impart to the consciousness the desired idea or conviction, and then this mental state must be attested and verified as the truth of God, divinely communicated; and both these are the gifts of the same great Revealer. We have spoken of the two methods of Divine manifestation, the "ecstasy," and the "vision," as only slightly modified forms of the same mode. The identity of the higher forms of dreaming, attended as they often are with an abnormal consciousness and strange powers of perception, and the state of trance, (the superior state" of the animal magnetists,) is satisfactorily demonstrated. Of this mysterious susceptibility of our nature the Divine power has made use, in imparting to mankind a knowledge of certain truths which lie beyond the range of sense and reason. By means of such extra-rational intuitions, the transcendent realities of revelation have been communicated, and also certified to be of Divine origin. Like all other supernatural phenomena, however, these seem to have been employed but unfrequently and with an apparent frugality; or, rather, that they might continue to be "signs and wonders," they were not permitted to become common. As manifest tokens of the Divine power, they served an important purpose, but they were evidently not intended to serve as the principal vehicle of revelation.

As to a very large class of the prophetic teachings, it is evident that they were developed in the form of intuitions, mingling with the prophet's rational processes and presenting themselves to the recognition of the normal consciousness. The process by which minds converse with each other is wholly unknown to us; we only know the fact. When such conversation is effected through the senses, the consciousness recognizes the newly induced mental state from its inception; but it is not at all difficult to suppose that spiritual intercourse may take place beyond the range of consciousness, and reveal their results only after they have assumed the form of convictions. By such process, undoubtedly, the Divine word was often infused into human minds, silently and rationally, and yet so given as to attest the Divine authority of the inwrought convictions, and to authorize their enunciation with the formula, "Thus saith the Lord."

There is evidently still another, and by no means an inconsiderable class of revelations. Many prophecies seem to have been delivered by persons from whose minds the chief purport of their own utterances was wholly concealed. Sometimes, though not usually, the enigmatical character of the enunciations was detected by the prophet himself; but most commonly, the prophetic image was twofold, while only the proximate and often less important one was recognized. To this characteristic of prophecy the name "double sense" has been given, though it is scarcely proper to indicate the sense as really twofold. The Old Testament dispensation was itself a system of symbols, and this peculiarity is seen not more in its ritual and ceremonies than in its prophetic teachings. Almost every historical statement or biographical record has a deeper and fuller significance than appears to the careless beholder; and often the prophetic vision embraced, and the prophetic language delineated much more than the prophet intended or was properly aware of. "To the ancient Jew," writes our author, "the predictions concerning the liberation from exile were blended with those which related to the Messianic age, so as to present a mass of undistinguishable tracery." . . . . "Jeremiah connects in one picture the first conversion of the Jews in the days of Christ, with their general conversion in ages yet to come." David, by Divine inspiration, composes a prophetic Psalm for Solomon, but is carried beyond his proximate subject, and depicts a greater than Solomon, of whom that renowned prince was, in many respects, an illustrious type. In this method of symbolizing is found a large share of the prophetic utterances of the Scripture, and by its use, nearly everything contained in the Bible is made to bear upon its great cardinal truths and doctrines. Both methods of prophetic utterances, the direct and the symbolical, date from the beginning of the history of Redemption; for in the day of the first transgression, the prediction of the conflict and triumph of "the seed of the woman" stood over against the institution of sacrifices. These, indeed, have never been divided, but have stood together as two sure witnesses mutually attesting the truths of revelation, and by their united instructions the world was prepared to receive the coming Messiah.

It is important in this inquiry to clearly discriminate between the special inspiration exercised in the gift of the Holy Scriptures, and the spiritual influence which is promised as the perpetual legacy of Christ's disciples. The former was given by the manifestation of the eternal Word; the latter is of the ministrations of the Comforter As to their substance, that was external and objective, and so presented as to be recognized as something distinct from the recipient himself; this is subjective, "the word is nigh thee, in thy heart and in thy mouth," and hence may be confounded with the mind's own original processes. As to their forms, they are also dissimilar; for while the teachings of the Word are general, revealing the Divine purposes relative to our race, and to individuals only in view of general facts and characteristics, the ministrations of the Spirit are personal, and apply to their subjects individually. The one reveals God to the human understanding; the other manifests him in the essential reason; the former discloses the facts and provisions of the Gospel scheme of grace; the latter prepares the individual spirit of man to apprehend the things so revealed, and to realize his personal relations to them.

The offices of the Word and those of the Spirit being thus specifically distinct, it would be unreasonable to expect that they should supplement each other. The work of revealing is g definite and limited one, both as to its substance and the time of its execution, and accordingly it ceased with the apostolic age the whole of the counsels of grace having at that time been committed to the Church, with all needful proofs and attestations. It is therefore quite absurd to speak of new revelations given by the ministration of the Spirit, who "shall not speak anything of himself." Fanaticism, which is always founded in doctrinal error, though often coexisting with honesty of purpose, is ever attempting to add something either to the matter or to the credibility of the sacred record; but the plain teachings of the things clearly revealed show the impossibility of all such attempts or pretensions. Under the dispensation of the Spirit there are no provisions for revelations, and evidently the prophetic office did not extend beyond the age of the apostles. The great glory of the Gospel dispensation is the cooperation of the Word and the Spirit in the Church, one through the divinely communicated records of the truth, and the other as a living and quickening Spirit of truth in the hearts of the willing and obedient.

But while we thus assign the whole work of revealing to God the Son, we would not, by any means, exclude the Spirit from a very important share in the production of the Holy Scriptures. To proclaim the words of revelation to fallen and depraved men, would have availed nothing, had not their minds been first prepared to receive and appreciate the things so revealed. it was therefore needful that the prophetic mind should be so elevated by a Divine inspiration as to become a proper receptacle and medium of the Divine messages-a work appropriate to the Holy Spirit. The whole custody of the matter of revelation belongs also to the Spirit, and not to the Word of God; and hence the form and outward fashion of the Scriptures are of his inspiration. His supervision extends beyond revelations, strictly so called, and covers also the historical and illustrative portions of the Bible; which were often written from the personal knowledge of the sacred penman, or copied from reliable public records, but to which also is imparted by the Spirit the character of inspiration which pertains to the whole Bible. This consideration may also apply, though in a modified and perhaps mitigated form, to the compilation of the canon, and the transcription of the sacred books. Surely it is not unreasonable to presume, that the inspiring Spirit which dwells with the Church, is ever mindful of that truth upon which, as a well adapted instrument, lie relies for the sanctification and final glorification of the faithful, and that he keeps it safe from any and all mutilations and corruptions by which its efficiency would be diminished.

In considering the character of the Scriptures, it is necessary to regard them as constituting an organized whole. Such a unity, actually existing, will be readily discovered by every ingenuous and intelligent reader of the Bible; and only after it has been discovered is he prepared to understand the things he reads. It is a fixed law of interpretation, without regarding which it would be impossible to rightly understand almost any written production, that the scope and design of the work should be perceived and regarded as a clew to its sense. This rule must be applied in interpreting the Scriptures, and by it the meaning of their language must be settled. Assuming, then, that the great design of the Bible is to reveal "God in Christ reconciling the world to himself," we may legitimately expect to find the traces of this great purpose in any and all parts of the sacred record. We should perhaps hesitate as to going the whole length with a certain class of commentators, formerly more in favor than at present, who found or simulated a direct or symbolical prophecy in nearly every passage in the Bible. On the other hand, we are quite as far from agreeing with those who seem determined to recognize no allusion to its great theme, whenever it is possible to escape it, by critical finesse. The Jewish theocracy was unquestionably constructed upon a Messianic basis, and of necessity in many cases a Messianic interpretation of its literature is the only rational one, even were another possible, within the range of verbal criticism. This all-pervading element is really the inspiration of the Holy Scriptures, which resides not chiefly in a mechanical arrangement of certain sentences and words, letters and points, but is an indwelling and outspeaking divinity, animating and actuating the whole book. "They are they that testify of me."

As in nature, so also in his word, God has embodied his teachings in concrete forms much more generally than in abstract propositions. This method is best adapted to render certain and definite these all-important truths, which words are not adequate fully to convey. It is therefore not so much a matter of interest to know what a certain text of Scripture may mean as to ascertain the drift and scope of the whole volume. The words of Scripture often lose their whole pertinence and force by being removed from their connection, as a member of the body becomes useless and without beauty by being separated. from its connection. Biblical interpreters have agreed, that no single text is sufficient to establish any point of doctrine; and in doing this, whether aware of it or not, they have deferred the verbal infallibility of the Scriptures to their plenary and universal inspiration. Particular words and phrases, we are told, must be explained agreeably to the "analogy of faith;" and to this we most heartily consent, taking the general teachings of the Bible as the rule of that faith. 'But, then, what is to become of the "particular word and phrases?" Some will tell us that we must still believe that they meant originally what they are thus made to mean; but others esteem this an unnecessary demand upon their implicit faith, and without at all surrendering their confidence in the Bible as an inspired book and an infallible rule of faith, they nevertheless suspect the verbal accuracy of the parts which require such a violent mode of interpretation.

In a compilation, though the several portions unite harmoniously in forwarding the one design, we naturally expect accidental discrepances among the particular parts, in points not pertaining to the organic whole. No one would feel, in an ordinary case, that such discrepances would mar the integrity or diminish the credibility of the whole, but rather the opposite; nor can we see any sufficient reason why the same considerations do not apply to the interpretation of the Scriptures. If this is granted, the scope and purposed teachings of the inspired volume are still clearly evident, and the stamp of infallibility is made upon all that pertains to the integrity of the faith,

There seems, therefore, to be an antecedent probability that in the texture of the Holy Scriptures may be brief and incidentally introduced portions and certain statements of facts, used for illustration rather than historical confirmation, to which, in their own proper character, the peculiar inspiration of the Bible does not extend. As far as such portions are used, whether as facts or illustrations, they must be correct, and we have no right to expect anything further than this. All this is quite consistent with the fullest confidence in the sufficiency and infallibility of the Scriptures as a guide, both as to what we should believe, and what we ought to do. Whoever reads the Bible with the spirit of a learner, will most certainly detect its spirit, and apprehend its revealings, though he may often fail to reconcile apparent discrepances, or to understand some of its incidental statements and allusions. And if the Bible, thus considered, is found to be effective in imparting to ingenuous, though uncritical readers, a knowledge of the truths and doctrines of inspiration, it accomplishes its great end, and is found sufficient to meet all the requirements of the case.

We can hardly conceive of a greater injustice to the sacred volume than to make it responsible for every historical, philosophical, or scientific fact or principle, named or alluded to in its pages. We never deal in this wise with any other work. A mistaken notion of the purposes of the Bible, united with a superstitious regard for its exterior, has led many good people to deprecate all rational criticism in its interpretation. Thus has arisen a real and highly pernicious Bibliolatry, at once unfriendly to rational Christian faith, and to a right understanding of the inspired word. As the natural result of this false notion, the truths of the Bible have been brought into question at each stage in the progress of human science. The dispute relative to the Copernican system in the age of Galileo, and the questions respecting the physical history of the earth at the present time, are cases in point. But the ablest Biblical critics are now settling down in the conviction, that in the Scriptural use of language relative to matters of philosophy, the apparent rather than the real is contemplated, and in science, the theory in vogue at the time of writing, and not the certainly correct one, is adopted. The Bible is designed for all ages, and for people in all stages of knowledge and culture; it must therefore be 'in-entangled with the ever- changing questions of science and philosophy. Had it embraced and authenticated them, as they stood at the times of its composition, its parts would have been discordant, and the whole obsolete and untrue in all after times. Had it embodied them in their essential truthfulness, it would have been either wholly unintelligible or else a source of hopeless confusion. Things are therefore spoken of according to the generally-received notions of them; but they were not by this indorsed by the hand and seal of Divine revelation. A thousand mutations in the forms of human philosophy can produce no effect upon the sacred verity of the word of God, though they do greatly modify its external aspects; and the Bible is as heartily believed by the most learned philosopher of the present times, as it was by the most unlettered pietist of the Dark Ages.

A like consideration will, we think, apply to the historical statements introduced in the Scriptures. Here, however, great caution is required, since, in not a few cases, matters of fact and of doctrine are so intimately blended, that the two must stand or fall together. Whenever this is the case, we have the right to require and expect the same infallible certainty for the former as for the latter; and we cannot consistently claim inspiration for the one and deny it to the other. But it is clearly the ease that in many instances the infallible certainty of a revealed doctrine does not require the absolute correctness of the statement of facts with which it is enunciated. Biblical scholars have long been divided as many very considerable historical statements; as to which the Scriptural record is apparently either self-contradictory, or at variance with the best profane authorities. But the Christian world has very little practical interest in such questions. The gracious power of the Saviour is about equally tested, whether we conclude he met two or only one blind man, as he came out of Jericho; nor does it at all affect the real merits of the case, whether we conclude, according to one evangelist, that both the thieves on the cross reviled the Saviour, or with another, that while one reviled him, the other rebuked his fellow in guilt and suffering. A considerable number of such instances arc found in the Scriptures of both the Old and the New Testaments; and as their infallibility is not essential to the authority of the Bible as a system of religious instruction, may we not presume that in these things human infirmity was permitted to err, while the sub-stance of the truth was sacredly guarded by the inspiring Spirit?

Any adequate view of the Holy Scriptures must recognize their human element no less clearly than the Divine. Upon this subject, the work before us contains some exceedingly pertinent and felicitous suggestions, which our limits will not allow us to transcribe. Here, no less than in the persons of apostles or in the sacred functions of the Church, the treasure of eternal life is contained in earthen vessels. Had the inspiration of the sacred writers been absolutely complete, and their co-operation wholly passive and mechanical, then, indeed, we would have had a revelation unmixed with human elements, and without the marks of the personal peculiarities of the several writers. But such is not the case. Each sacred penman retains his own chirography, or gives to the record the signs of his idiosyncrasies. The princely Isaiah and the rustic Amos each impresses his own mental characteristics upon his pages. The harp of David betrays the royalty of the hand that waked its melodies, and sharply distinguished its sounds from the plaintive wailings of those who sat down by the rivers of Babylon. The earnest spirit of Paul, the fervid zeal of Peter, the rigid virtue of James, and the holy love of John, are all seen alike in their writings and in' their personal histories. In this feature, indeed, we recognize one of the great excellences of the Bible. It is a kind of perpetual incarnation of the truth of God, as is Jesus an incarnation of his person. It was not enough that God should speak to mankind; it was also needful that his word should be made over to them, that in all beyond its essential spirituality it should become human. Such it is, in its mode of thought, its forms of expressions, and generally in all its external conditions.. And as Jesus, though essential God' made flesh, bore (FOURTH SERIES, VOL. X.-18) in himself our human infirmities, and was doubtless capable of mistakes, but nevertheless was absolutely the "true and faithful witness;" so, is it at all unlikely that the human mold into which the truth of God is cast, should in like manner have the incidental defects that pertain to its humanity? And, as we feel the Saviour most sacredly near to us when we contemplate him as a man, of like passions with ourselves, so doubtless we will find a holy sympathy in the words of Scripture, in proportion as we recognize the human element intimately combined with the Divine. While, therefore, we claim and contend earnestly for the inspiration of the Bible, for a living and energizing spirit of truth diffused through and animating its pages, we delight also to recognize its human form, and to commune with its utterances as with. the voice of a friend. Nor do we any the less reverence its lessons, because we suspect that it is not wholly raised above all human infirmities. In this we may be wrong ; but if so, the error is one of the heart as well as of the understanding.

To dissent. from this view of the case, would require more of the objector than may be at first apparent, and more, we presume, than many will be prepared to concede. If every word and sentence of the Bible must be held to be absolutely and infallibly correct, in order to entitle it to confidence as a rule of faith and morals, this demand applies not simply to the Bible as originally given to mankind, but rather to it as actually possessed by them. In that case all the media of communication must need have been wholly under the Divine direction, and the beast upon which the prophet rode could have served as well as the prophet himself for such a medium. So, too, the hand of the scribe must have been infallibly and mechanically directed, with no more active personal agency than has the automaton in its movements. So, also, must a mechanical Providence preserve and diffuse the sacred deposit, protecting manuscripts from all omissions and interpolations, and infallibly guiding the hands of translators to write in other languages the uncorrupted-that is, the verbally unmodified-truth. We do not object to all this as an impossibility, a priori, though we might do so; but as matter of fact, we know it is untrue, and we also see abundant reason why the Divine Providence should have chosen another method.

By the theory of inspiration we have indicated, and only by this, as we view the subject, are we able to maintain the position of evangelical Protestantism in its claims to a free and sufficient Bible, against the pretensions of Romanism on the one hand, and the cavils of rationalists and skeptics on the other. The Church of Rome claims for itself an inspiration not unlike in character that some-times claimed by Protestants for the Bible. Theirs, indeed, is less fixed and certain in its determinations, but it is more' flexible and capable of adaptation, and is also replete with a more genial sympathy. But both alike pretend to a rigid and formal infallibility, a finished and consigned revelation, the one, as dwelling in the ecclesiastical organism, the other, as in the letter of the Scriptures The present energy of the Spirit is constructively excluded by both, and an infallibility per se claimed in both cases. Accordingly, the papist submits his entire creed to the keeping of the Church, and from the lips of his spiritual instructor receives explicit directions in every emergency. Not so, however, the Protestant, who must draw his precepts from his Bible, in the exercise of his own private judgment. This, indeed, he may do, since the teachings of the Scriptures are, as to all things essential to life and godliness, exceedingly plain, provided he have confidence in the genuineness of the Bible as he possesses it. But if he concludes that absolute correctness in every point, great or small, is requisite to the credibility of the Bible, and at the same time learns that his is only an imperfectly rendered, version of the Divinely dictated word, his faith will rest on an uncertain and unsatisfactory foundation.

Only a small portion of any people can become able Biblical scholars; and hence the great mass of Protestants can have only our imperfect vernacular versions of the Scriptures, which, on the ground assumed by the advocates of literal infallibility, are quite unreliable, as bases for religious opinions. On the contrary, we assume that the spirit and essence of Divine revelation does not reside in specific texts and sentences, but is diffused throughout the texture of the volume, and operates in the integrity of its power wherever a generally correct and comprehensive version of the Scriptures is used. "Jots" and "tittles" in the verbiage of the Bible are often changed, and yet the integrity of the sacred word is unimpaired. It is just now proclaimed to the Christian public of this country, that our good old English Bibles have become faulty and uncertain as copies of the authorized translation made and issued by royal authority'; but we do not therefore conclude that hitherto we have been without any reliable rule of faith. Probably an absolutely correct copy of the Bible, considered literally, is not now in existence, and yet we glory, nevertheless, in Chillingworth's declaration, "THE BIBLE, THE BIBLE, is the religion of Protestants."

In conclusion, we rejoice in the new interest which this question is eliciting. We anticipate much good from its examination. Christianity commends itself to man's intelligence in proportion to the severity of the scrutiny to which its claims are subjected; and the Holy Scriptures "in which are hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge," rise in commanding dignity and authority, in proportion as they are submitted to fearless, but intelligent criticism. Heaven and earth shall pass away, but the word of the Lord endureth forever.

HTML conversion and formatting by Ryan Danker and Brandon Boyd for the Wesley Center for Applied Theology at Northwest Nazarene University.

© Copyright 1999 by the Wesley Center for Applied Theology. Text may be freely used for personal or scholarly purposes or mirrored on other web sites, provided this notice is left intact. Any use of this material for commercial purposes of any kind is strictly forbidden without the express permission of the Wesley Center at Northwest Nazarene University, Nampa, ID 83686. Contact the webmaster for permission or to report errors.