Sivut kuvina
PDF
ePub

One of these passages is, 2 Pet. i. 21: "For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." The writer had just before spoken of the evidence which he and his fellow disciples had of the divine mission and glory of Christ, from what they saw of his majesty in the holy mount, and from the voice which they there heard froin heaven, declaring him to be the Son of God. But clear as that evidence was, he represents the evidence arising from prophecy to be still clearer. "We have also," he says, "a more sure word of prophecy, whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light shining in a dark place." And then, to recommend prophecy as a sure means of discovering the character of Christ, and to show that it may be safely relied upon, he adds: "For the, prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

Prophecy, in this place, has evidently a very extensive meaning, including all the representations of the Messiah contained in the Old Testament. Some learned commentators, under the influence of infidel principles, have denied that any real predictions of Christ can be found in the Old Testament. But if we have confidence in the knowledge and veracity of Christ and his apostles, we shall be satisfied that the Scriptures of the Old Testament contain many more predictions and other representations of Christ, than some Christians suppose. The text, in Luke xxiv. 27, clearly shows how Christ regarded this subject. "And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, Jesus expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning himself." There was then something of the nature of prophetic representation respecting the Messiah, in Moses and all the prophets, and in all the Scriptures. The 44th verse of the same chapter is of similar import: "And Jesus said unto them, these are the words which I spake unto you while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written concerning me, in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms." Now it was of prophecy, understood in this extensive sense, that Peter said, "The prophecy came not in old time by the will of man; but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

We are not, however, to suppose that Peter, thus attributing inspiration to this particular part of the Scriptures, implies that other parts are not equally inspired. He attributed inspiration particularly to prophecy, because he then had occasion to speak of prophecy, and he wished to show in what estimation it was worthy to be held, and how perfectly it was suited to answer the end for which he exhorted Christians to use it. Whenever he had occasion to refer to other parts of the Scriptures, he showed the same respect for them, and represented them as being of equal authority with prophecy.

The other passage which directly asserts the fact of divine inspiration, is 2 Tim. iii. 16; "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness." Here, as in 2 Pet. i. 21, the inspiration of the Scriptures is spoken of as an important practical subject. It is spoken of as connected with their being profitable for doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction, and their being able to make men wise unto salvation, and to furnish them thoroughly for every good work.

τος.

Our apostle says, "All Scripture is divinely inspired," DeoπveurSome writers think the passage should be rendered, All inspired Scripture, or all Scripture being divinely inspired, is profitable for doctrine, &c. The sense is not materially different. According to the common rendering, the inspiration of all Scripture is asserted; SEOTVEVOTOS being the predicate. According to the other rendering, inspiration is presupposed; 9E0TVEVOTOS being the subject. But I submit it to those who are competent to judge, whether this last rendering, though adopted by some very respectable authors, is not liable to an insuperable objection, as 9E0TVEUGTOs and weλipos are closely connected by the conjunction xa, and therefore must both be predicates, if either of them is. And one of them must evidently be a predicate, in order to make a complete sentence.

I here take for granted, what has often been satisfactorily proved, that when Paul speaks of all Scripture, he must be understood to mean all the writings which were held sacred by the Jews at that time; and that those writings were the same as constitute the Old Testament now in common use. We have proof then, from the plain, direct affirmation of the apostle, that all the Old Testament Scriptures are divinely inspired.

The former of the two passages quoted, casts light upon the latter. Paul asserts that all Scripture is divinely inspired. If any one wishes to know what is meant by being divinely inspired, he will find an explanation in the words of Peter. To say that the Scriptures are divinely inspired, is the same as to say, that those who wrote them, wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

In both of these texts it is evidently implied, that there is an essential difference between the Holy Scriptures and all other writings, as to their origin, or the manner in which they were first produced. Other writings come by the will of man; they originate in voluntary human efforts. Human genius and labor are sufficient to produce them. The effects produced are to be referred to man in the exercise of his natural powers, as the sole cause. But this is not the case with the Scriptures. It is not sufficient to say, the writers were honest and intelligent men, and wrote what they knew or believed to be true. This may be said of many other - writings. But who would think it proper to affirm, that those other writings came not by the will of man, or that they were given by

[ocr errors]

inspiration of God? Who would put this high distinction upon them, that the authors wrote as they were impelled by the Holy Ghost? It must then be very manifest, that he who undertakes to account for the Old Testament Scriptures by alleging, that the writers had a sound understanding, and the best means of information; that they were men of unimpeachable integrity; that they were diligent in their labors, and watchful against mistakes; and that they wrote on subjects on which they had a competent knowledge; he who undertakes to account for the Scriptures by alleging these things, and stops here, leaving out the grand fact, that the sacred penmen wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, and that their writings were divinely inspired, entirely sets aside the meaning of what both Paul and Peter assert, and overlooks the high and sacred characteristic, by which they distinguish the Scriptures from all other writings.

But there are other representations in the New Testament, which confirm the argument above stated.

To every intelligent reader of the New Testament, it must have occurred, as a remarkable fact, that the Scriptures of the Old Testament are frequently called the word of God. In this designation of these Scriptures, Christ and his apostles agree with the prophets. Now in what sense did the writers of the New Testament use the phrase, the word of God, when they applied it to designate their Scriptures? They evidently used it to distinguish the Scriptures from the traditions of men, and from all writings of human origin, and to signify that God had invested these books with divine authority. And if we take into view the representation before mentioned, we shall naturally conclude that when the apostles called the Scriptures the word of God, they had reference to their inspiration. These sacred books are not denominated the word of God, because they contain instruction respecting God and divine things, nor because the instruction they contain is true. For if any writings not inspired, either treatises on the attributes of God, or on the duties of man, or histories of the events of divine providence, should be perfectly free from error; they would not, on that account, be the word of God. Is every truth which a man speaks, the word of God? It is much more reasonable to suppose that, when the apostles called the Scriptures the word of God, they had their eye upon their divine original, and meant to imply, that they were written under the special guidance of the Holy Spirit, and so were stamped with divine authority.

Let me just remark here, that although different parts of Scripture were given in different ways, so far as human agency was concerned, we cannot allow any difference in regard to the reality of inspiration. Those parts which contain direct communications from God relating to future events, or relating to any doctrines before unknown, are nowhere distinguished, in respect of divine in

spiration or divine authority, from those parts which relate to things before known. No one who carefully examines the subject can doubt the truth of this remark.

The next argument I shall use to prove the inspiration of the Old Testament Scriptures is, that Christ and his apostles treat them as possessing an authority entirely different from that of any other writings.

The books, called the Scriptures, were constantly appealed to by the authors of the New Testament, as having supreme authority on all questions of doctrine and duty. Neither Christ nor the apostles ever speak of any book or any sentence of the Old Testament, in a manner which implies, that they regarded it as a human production. They constantly represent it in such a light as to show, that disobedience to any part of it is disobedience to God, and that contempt of any part of it is contempt of the divine authority.

It will be proper here to give a few examples of the manner in which Christ and the apostles refer to particular parts of the Old Testament. The reader will see that, to whatever part they have occasion to refer, they treat it as possessing the same divine authority.

Matt. xix. 4-6. In answer to the question of the Pharisees, on the subject of divorce, Christ appealed to the particular account which Moses gave of the creation, as of decisive authority. "Have ye not read, (i. e. in the Scriptures, Gen. ii.) that he who made them in the beginning, made them male and female, and said, for this cause shall a man leave his father and mother, and cleave to his wife?" Rom. iv. 3. Paul here shows that he regarded what was said of Abraham, (Gen. xv. 6.,) as of decisive authority. "For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted to him for righteousness." He referred to this passage as conclusive evidence of his doctrine. In verse 6th, he refers in the same manner to what David said, Psalm xxxii. 1; "Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven." Again, verse 17th, he refers to what is said of Abraham in Genesis; "As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations." In John x. 34, 35, we see what stress was laid on a particular expression in the Old Testament. "Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said ye are gods? If he called them gods, to whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken," &c., implying, that the particular declaration quoted from Psalm lxxxii, though it might seem to be of no special consequence, was yet of divine authority, and could not be invalidated. In 1 Cor. xv. 27, is another example of the stress which is laid on a particular text. The quotation is from Psalm viii. "He hath put all things under his

feet. But when he saith, all things are put under him," &c. The apostle understood the passage as relating to Christ, and reasons from it as having an authority which could belong to no human production. The author of the epistle to the Hebrews attaches the same importance to other expressions found in the same Psalm.

Examples of this kind might be multiplied; but the design of this discussion does not admit of it. It is obvious that whenever Christ or the apostles had occasion to refer to any passage, whether longer or shorter, in any part of the Old Testament, they refer to it as being the word of God, and as possessing divine authority. Sometimes they refer in general terms to the Scriptures, taken together, and represent them all as divine. At other times, they represent particular texts in the same light. They never intimate that there is any exception.

Now the Lord Jesus possessed a fulness of divine knowledge, and came on purpose to guard men against error, and to teach them all necessary truth; he commissioned and qualified his apostles to execute the same office. Both he and they had constant occasion to speak of the Old Testament Scriptures, and to show how they regarded them, and how they would have others regard them. But they never, in a single instance, taught or said the least thing which implied that there was any book or any text contained in the Scriptures, which was not the word of God, and which had not divine authority. And they never said anything which implied that one part was the word of God in a lower sense, or that it had less authority than other parts. They never gave the least intimation which was calculated to make any such impression on the minds of Christians. They never gave any caution to Christians, or even to Jews, against attributing too high an authority, or attaching too much importance, to the Holy Scriptures. They were so far from this, that it was evidently a great object with them to produce among men a higher reverence for all, and every part, of the sacred volume, and to excite them more diligently to search it, and more entirely to confide in it, as containing divine truth unmixed with error. Now this manner of treating the Scriptures agrees perfectly with the position, that they are divinely inspired; that holy men of God spake and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. But it is totally contrary to the supposition, that the writing of the Scriptures. is to be accounted for by means of human genius and labor, or in any way which supersedes the supernatural agency of God. For it is perfectly plain that no book, which is produced by man, in the exercise of his natural powers merely, can be entitled to that kind of respect and reverence, which Christ and his apostles manifested for the sacred Scriptures, or to that unqualified confidence which they require Christians to repose in them. For any merely hu

« EdellinenJatka »