CHAPTER III.

EXAMINATION OF THE ARGUMENT FROM THE AUTHORITY CLAIMED FOR SCRIPTURE BY THE NEW TESTAMENT WRITERS.

We now proceed to the most complicated and difficult part of our subject, the argument-namely, in favour of the Bible's infallibility, drawn from the authority claimed for Scripture by the writers of the New Testament.

At the outset, let us see what this argument really is. The New Testament writings are assumed to be infal lible. The New Testament writings state, or imply, that the Old Testament writings are infallible. Thus it is, by some, supposed to be apparent that the whole Bible is infallible. Now, even supposing that it can be shown that the New Testament does assert the infallibility of the Old Testament and of itself, what proof can be given that the New Testament is not mistaken in this very matter? To this it is commonly replied, that miracles, prophecies, and Jesu's promises of the Spirit of truth, guarantee the infallibility of the New Testament writings. But we have already seen that, on the showing of the Bible itself, miracles and prophecies utterly fail in proving the infallibility of their workers or enunciators; and in a subsequent part of this Book we shall take occasion to examine the promises of Christ which are said to bear on this point. In the meanwhile, let us here content ourselves with asking who guarantees

the exact correctness with which these promises of Christ are recorded? The only possible answer is, the New Testament writers. Thus, then, the New Testament writers guarantee the infallible accuracy of their own narration of Jesu's words of promise, and then those words of promise are supposed to guarantee the infallibility of the New Testament writings. If this be not arguing in a circle, we know no instance of that fallacy.

From these considerations it is clear that no weight can logically attach to the complicated argument, in favour of scriptural infallibility, which is drawn from the authority claimed for Scripture by the New Testament writers. It is as futile as if one should say all the Pope's utterances must be infallible, because he himself claims infallibility as attaching to some of his sentences. But, not to press this point, let us look closely into the argument in question. The infallibility, said to be claimed for Scripture by the New Testament, purports to be claimed either by the Jews, the disciples of Christ, or by Jesus himself.

Doubt

A. THE OPINION OF THE JEWS ON THIS SUBJECT. IN the case of the Jews what is to be said? less they did, for centuries after Christ, believe their Bible to be verbally inspired, and wholly infallible. To this testify the Masoretic diligence and exactness in counting and recording the number of scriptural books, words, letters, and even vowel points. And that this

feeling prevailed among the people of Judæa, at least as early as our Saviour's time, is abundantly apparent from many passages in the gospel history. For instance, the chief priests and scribes at once fixed on Bethlehem as necessarily the birthplace of the Messiah; "for," said they, "thus it is written by the prophet." The inspired seer, Micah, had so prescribed the will of God, and his writing-it was believed-could not err. Why not? Evidently because those priests and scribes partook of the prevailing national belief in the infallibility of Holy Writ.

B. THE OPINION OF THE EVANGELISTS.

THAT the Evangelists, and indeed all the disciples of Christ, should hold this part of the Jewish creed, is what was naturally to be expected; and, accordingly, the sympathy of the Evangelists in a reverence for the infallibility of the Old Testament is largely shown by their well-known formulary, "Now all this was done that" (hina-in order that) "it might be fulfilled which was "spoken of the Lord by the prophet."

Of course we do not regard the testimony of the Jews on this, or on any other subject, as a decisive and unquestionable authority: and the value at which the opinion of the Evangelists on this subject is to be taken, must depend on the evidence which can be produced in proof of their infallibility; but the point to be noticed here is, that our Lord's four biographers had their own minds strongly impregnated with this current Jewish

notion. In their judgment, it was a part of piety to regard the Old Testament Scriptures as the unerring dictates of Jehovah; so that we can well understand how, in depicting an historical portraiture of Jesus, they would delight in every possible opportunity of recording expressions, in which that holy One seemed to countenance their own favourite preconception.

C. ALLEGED UTTERANCES OF JESUS ON THIS SUBJECT.

WITH these remarks, and supposing, for the sake of our argument, that the four Gospels give us the "ipsissima verba" of our Lord, we proceed to enumerate and examine what we believe will be found to be fair and adequate specimens of the strongest declarations, in support of scriptural sanctity and authority, which Jesus is

Isaid to have uttered.

Matthew, for instance, tells us that, in Christ's sermon on the Mount,* the words occurred, "Till heaven "and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass "from the law till all be fulfilled ;" and, again, the divine preacher is represented as saying, "I am not come to destroy the law or the prophets, but to fulfil."

66

The same Evangelist tells us, how Jesus, rebuking the Jews for bidding defiance to the moral duty of filial kindness, said, "Thus have ye made the commandment "of God of none effect by your tradition." †

Similarly, too, in strong apparent support of inspirational infallibility, Jesus, arguing with the Jews as to

*Matt. v. 18.

† Matt. xv. 6.

H

the divine nature or the unique excellence of the Christ, asks them to explain how it is, if Messiah be David's merely ordinary human son, that "David in spirit calls "him Lord?"* Is it not here implied by Jesus that the inspired David could not err even in a word? Does not this saying of the Son of God prove even the verbal inspiration and infallibility of the Old Testament? And, again, is not that other passage, from the Gospel of John, another convincing proof that our blessed Saviour held what is commonly called the highest doctrine of verbal inspiration; when he replied to his Jewish accusers by reminding them, that it could hardly be blasphemy for him to "call himself the Son of God," since it was written in their law (Psalm lxxxii. 6), "I said ye "are gods." "If then," argues Jesus, "he called them "gods unto whom the word of God came, and the Scripture cannot be broken, say ye of him whom the "Father hath sanctified, and sent into the world, thou blasphemest because I said I am the Son of God?"† Do not these two texts plainly prove to every believer, that Jesus regarded the words of the Old Testament as infallibly inspired?

66

66

But, yet again, see how our Lord revered the words of the prophets. It was in the solemn night of his betrayal that he warned his apostles, saying, "All ye "shall be offended because of me this night, for it is "written (Zech, xiii. 7), I will smite the shepherd, "and the sheep of the flock shall be scattered abroad." And it was at the same awful period that Jesus spoke + John x. 35.

*Matt. xxii. 43.

Matt. xxvi. 31.