Ess. v.]

Antecedent Probability.

69

however certainly Divine in their origin, would have become comparatively useless; the message of God could not fail to have been obscured and impaired by the infirmity and ignorance of those who delivered it; nor could we, under such circumstances, have been required to yield to it (especially in its deeper and more mysterious parts) that implicit belief and obedience, without which no one can participate in the blessings and privileges of true religion. Since then, in order to the accomplishment of those ends to which revelation declares itself to be directed, the inspiration of the record, as one link in the chain, appears on very obvious principles to have been absolutely indispensable, and since, in the works of the Deity, there is no shortness and inconsistency, it must evidently be deemed in a very high degree probable, a priori, that the record was really inspired.

In considering the positive evidences, by which this antecedent probability is confirmed, and by which the Divine authority of the Bible is, in my opinion, ascertained, I shall commence with the Old Testament.

I. We have already found occasion to remark that, before the coming of the Messiah, the Hebrew Scriptures had been formed into a canon, were carefully preserved in the archives of the temple, and were publicly read in the synagogues of the Jews. Now it is certain that the sacred volume, which was the object of so much care and attention among that people, was universally considered by them to be of Divine origin and authority. The reverence with which the early Jews regarded the Hebrew Scriptures was evinced, not only by the titles which they applied to them, such as "the books of holiness," "the holy thing of the Lord," but also by certain practices of a ceremonial nature. It was their custom to kiss the Bible on opening and shutting it, and ever to place it at the top of all other books; nor was it considered lawful to have recourse to it with unwashen hands: see Leusden, Philol. Hebr., diss. i., sect. 1. Philo, the Jewish philosopher, who was contemporary with Christ, and was deeply versed in the books of the Old Testament, styles them, in various parts of his works, "the sacred writings," "the oracles of God;" and in his numerous quotations from both the historical and prophetical parts of the Bible, he very generally notices the Divine authority of

70

The Old Testament.

[Ess. v. that which he cites. Josephus also, in his work against Apion, has written on this important subject in very decisive terms. "These writings," he says, in speaking of the Hebrew Scriptures, "contain an account of all time, and are justly held to be Divine. It is proved, by experience, in what degree we have faith in the writings which belong to us; for, although so long a period has now elapsed since they were composed, no one has been so daring as to add anything to them, or to take anything away from them. But it is a common principle, imbibed by all the Jews from their very birth, to consider them as the doctrines of God, to abide by them, and, if need be, willingly to die for them:" lib. i. cap. 8.

That the sentiments thus prevalent among the early Jews respecting the Divine authority of the Old Testament were correct, appears from the testimony of Jesus Christ and his apostles-a testimony which relates to so plain a subject, which is so worked into the gospel narrative, and which is so frequently and variously given, that its validity cannot be reasonably disputed by any persons who have already admitted that the New Testament is genuine and authentic, and that Christianity is the religion of God. The declaration of Jesus Christ in reference to such a point must be fully admitted to be true by all who acknowledge his Divine mission; and, with regard to the apostles, without any consideration, in the present stage of our argument, of the fact of their inspiration, it is only reasonable to conclude that they derived their doctrine on the subject from that celestial Teacher to whose service they were entirely devoted.

Our Lord in his discourses, and the evangelists and apostles in their writings, have made frequent mention of the Scriptures; and it must be evident to every attentive reader of the New Testament that, when they employed this term, they did not refer to writings in general, but solely to that particular collection of writings which was held sacred by the Jews, and which, by way of preeminence, was so denominated.

Now, from the manner in which they quoted from the Scriptures, it is easy to perceive that Jesus and his disciples fully coincided with the Jews, to whom for the most part they addressed themselves, respecting the Divine authority

Ess. v.]

Testimony of Jesus Christ.

71

of these sacred books. On various occasions, and more especially when his own person, character, and history were the subjects of discussion, the Lord Jesus was accustomed to appeal to the contents of the Old Testament as affording an unquestionable evidence of the truth. It was the Scriptures, he declared, which testified of himself: John v. 39. "These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you," said he to his disciples, "that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms, concerning me. Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the Scriptures," Luke xxiv. 44, 45; see also Matt. xxi. 42; xxvi. 54, etc. Not only, indeed, did our Lord elucidate, by the declarations of the Old Testament, the events which were then occurring, but sometimes he described the events themselves, as happening for the very purpose that the Scriptures might be fulfilled: see John xv. 25; xvii. 12; compare Matt. viii. 17, etc. Nor was it merely to the statements of the Old Testament respecting himself that Jesus appealed as prophetically true, and therefore of Divine origin. There were occasions on which he cited Scripture as the decisive authority in reference to other points of doctrinal or practical importance. Thus, when discoursing with the Sadducees on the subject of a future life, he traced their error of opinion to their ignorance of Scripture, and then confuted them by citing a passage from the book of Exodus: Matt. xxii. 32. Again, when the Jews accused him of blasphemy, because he said he was the Son of God, he silenced their cavils by an appeal to the sacred volume, and added an emphatic and most important declaration: "The Scripture cannot bo broken," John x. 34, 35; see also Mark xi. 17; Luke x. 26.

The apostles and evangelists, in their method of citing from the Old Testament, have closely followed the example of their Divine Master. Thus, when writing on the nature and importance of faith, Paul thus rests his argument on the authority of Holy Writ: "For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness," Rom. iv. 3. So the apostle Peter, after enforcing the necessity of coming to Jesus Christ, as to a living stone, adds, "Wherefore also is it contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner-stone,"

72

Apostolic testimony.

[Ess. v.

etc., 1 Peter ii. 6; and James, when describing the origin of wars and fightings-the lusts or evil passions of menconfirms his proposition by similar evidence: "Do ye think that the Scripture saith in vain, The spirit that dwelleth in us lusteth to envy?" iv. 5; compare Acts xviii. 28; Rom. ix. 17; xi. 8, etc.

Upon all these and many other similar passages in the Gospels and Epistles it is necessary to make two observations. First, that, in thus quoting from the Old Testament, Jesus Christ and his apostles made no invidious distinctions respecting the particular books of which it was composed. The historical and the prophetical parts of the Bible were alike the object of their deference, the standard of their doctrine; and although, in most of the instances in which they made mention of the Scriptures, they had in their view particular passages of the Bible, there is reason to believe that they adduced these passages as decisive, not because they flowed from the pen of any particular author, but because they formed a part of that class of writingsthat sacred and unalterable collection-to which, by way of distinction, was applied the name of "Scripture." Secondly, we can scarcely fail to remark, that, like Christians in the present day, they appealed to the Scriptures as to a source of certain information, a paramount indisputable authority, on all subjects connected with religious truth; nor could such an appeal have arisen from any thing short of a full admission that these holy books were really of Divine origin, or given by inspiration of God.

That such was, in fact, the impression under which their appeal was made, is confirmed by apostolic testimony of a yet more positive nature. When speaking of the prophets who wrote the Old Testament, Peter declares that it was the Spirit of Christ within them which testified of the future coming of our Lord, 1 Pet. i. 11; and again he says, that these "holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost," 2 Pet. i. 21. In the Epistle to the Hebrews, the words of David and Jeremiah are cited, without any express reference to those writers, simply as the words of the Holy Ghost, iii. 7; x. 15. But it is the second Epistle of Paul to Timothy which presents to us the most important passage in reference to the present subject-a passage luminous in itself, and,

when considered in connexion with the collateral evidence already stated, completely convincing on the point in question. "But continue thou," says the apostle to his son in the truth, Timothy, "in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; and that from a child thou hast known the Holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: that the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works," 2 Tim. iii.

14-17.

It has been observed, that the latter part of this passage is capable of being otherwise rendered, "Every writing, given by inspiration of God, is also profitable," etc. Now, if we adopt this translation, (which I would submit does not so properly represent the Greek as the version commonly received,) the passage will still afford a clear evidence of the Divine origin of Scripture. It is surely undeniable that, by "every writing given by inspiration of God," (if such can be deemed the right version of his words,) the apostle intended to express all those writings which, in the preceding verse, he denominated the Holy Scriptures; and it is equally certain that, by these latter expressions, he described the canon of writings received as Divine by the Jews; that is to say, the Old Testament. Whether, therefore, we understand the apostle as making a direct assertion, or only as elucidating by an epithet his notion of Scripture, we plainly learn from him that the Old Testament was given by inspiration of God.

II. Let us now proceed to consider the question before us, as it relates to the New Testament.

Since every Divine revelation, intended for permanent utility among men, so obviously requires a Divine Scripture, and since it actually pleased God, as is proved by the testimony of Jesus Christ and his apostles, to substantiate the revelations recorded in the Old Testament, by placing the stamp of his own authority on the writings which compose it, little doubt can reasonably be entertained that the final and more important revelation was attended by the same advantage. If the dispensations of God, revealed

E