force of zai,) because thou hast from a child known | minstrels, prophets, soothsayers of the temple the holy scriptures (of the Old Testament,) và of Apollo, &c.; vide s. 9;) ináλnoav ayıοi εoй δυνάμενα σε σοφίσαι εἰς σωτηρίαν διὰ πίστεως τῆς ἐν ἀνθρωποι (the prophets of the Old Testament,) Xpior Insov, which can instruct you in the for no oracle was delivered from the mere will of knowledge of that salvation which we obtain by man, (i. e., whether they should speak, and the Christian doctrine. Here Paul expresses his what and how they should speak, did not depend opinion that the Old Testament leads to Christ, on the will of the prophets ;) but the ancient proand is preparatory to Christianity. In ver. 16, phets spake as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. he proceeds to say, Пāsa ypa¶η Seóяvevotos (for The prophets themselves acknowledged, that Stórveustos ouda, according to Clemens of Alex- whatever they taught, whether by speaking or andria, Theodoret, the Syriac version, the Vul-writing, was dictated to them by God, or the gate, and nearly all the theologians of the six- Divine Spirit, and was published by his comteenth century; otherwise the article must be mand, Ex. iv. 12, 15, 16; Deut. xviii. 18; Jer. inserted before ypapy, and the comma after it be i. 6, seq.; Amos, iii. 7; Is. lxi. 1; Cf. Morus, retained,) καὶ ὠφέλιμος πρὸς διδασκαλίαν, πρὸς | p. 20, seq. ἔλεγχον, πρὸς ἐπανόρθωσιν, πρὸς παιδείαν τὴν ἐν dizaovvy, All inspired scripture (no part of it excepted) is also profitable for instruction (in the Christian religion), for conviction (confutation of errors, &c.), for improvement, and for discipline in virtue or piety. Ver. 17, "Iva aprios ἢ ὁ τοῦ Θεοῦ ἄνθρωπος, πρὸς πᾶν ἔργον ἀγαθὸν rprisμévos, By means of the Old-Testament scriptures the servant of God (Christian teacher) may become filted, and truly qualified for his important work. In this passage, therefore, Paul expresses the opinion, that the books of the Old Testament are inspired, and that, when rightly employed, they are useful even in Christian instruction. 2. 2 Pet. i. 19, 20. Vide Scripta Varii Argumenti, t. i. p. 1, seq. In this passage, Paul shews, in opposition to Jews and judaizing heretics, that Jesus was the true Messiah. In shewing this, he now appeals to those predictions of the Jewish prophets which had been fulfilled in him. Ver. 19, "We (apostles) find the oracles of the prophets (respecting Christ) much more convincing now (since they have been fulfilled ;) and ye will do well to attend to them. Formerly, before their fulfilment, they were obscure, like a lantern shining feebly on a dark path, until the appearance of Christ upon the earth, from which event a clearer light now proceeds, and we can better understand the prophecies." Ver. 20, Nor could the prophets themselves of the Old Testament give a clear explanation (invois from inikvew, explicare, Mark, iv. 34,) of their own oracles, because they had only indistinct conceptions of the subjects on which they spake, and knew only so much as was communicated to them, from time to time, by divine revelation." (This is the context of ver. 21; and what is here said agrees with the passage, 1 Pet. i. 10-12.) Ver. 21, Où yàp Sskýuari (1137, 7DM) ávIpúnov vézen ποτὲ προφητεία, ἀλλ ̓ ὑπὸ πνεύματος ἁγίου (divine impulse and guidance) pepóμɛvoc (pépɛosa, moveri, agitari, the word by which the Greeks commonly described the inspiration of their This passage from Peter proves the inspiration only of the prophetical part of the Old Testament, and not, strictly speaking, of the rest. But from the two passages taken together, it is obvious that the apostles believed the Old Testament, as a whole, to be inspired. We can find no evidence in all the New Testament that Christ and his apostles dissented in the least from the opinion commonly received among the Jews on this subject. But the Jews regarded the entire collection of the Old-Testament scriptures as divine. They were frequently called by Josephus and Philo, Sečar ypapár, iɛpà ypáμμara, and always mentioned with the greatest veneration. Divine inspiration (iníяvoia εov) is expressly conceded by Josephus to the prophets; and as none but prophets were permitted by the Jews to write their national history, and none but priests to transcribe it, (as appears from the same author;) we conclude that inspiration was also conceded by him and his contemporaries to their historical books. Josephus, Contra Apionem, I. 6, 7, 8. Cf. Morus, p. 20. Such were the prevailing opinions of the Jews of the first and second centuries, and long before the birth of Christ; and to these opinions Christ and his apostles plainly assented; they must, therefore, be adopted by all who allow Christ and his apostles to be divine teachers. The contemptuous expressions which many have permitted themselves to use with regard to the Old Testament are, as Morus justly observed, Epitome, p. 24, Christiano indignæ voces. The doubt may arise whether some of the historical books can be considered as the productions of prophets, as they were compiled from other works after the Babylonian exile. But no essential difference is made, even if what is supposed be true; since the most important parts of these historical books were extracted from larger histories, and ascribed to the prophets by whom they were originally written. So the extracts made in the books of Kings and Chronicles, from a larger history of Jewish kings, are ascribed to Isaiah. SECTION IX. HISTORICAL OBSERVATIONS, COMPARING THE CON CEPTIONS AND EXPRESSIONS OF THE ANCIENT tion, and everything accords with their philosophical system. But by applying these historical observations to these passages, we find that the sacred writers intended to teach a lite world respecting IMMEDIATE DIVINE INFLU-ral inspiration in the proper sense, and were so ENCE. I. The Idea of Inspiration Universal. We find that every nation of the ancient world believed in immediate divine influences, although the particular conceptions which they entertained on this subject varied with their local circumstances, and the different degrees of their intellectual culture: but in consequence of the prevalence of a strict and scholastic philosophy in modern times, our own conceptions on this subject have become widely different from those which formerly prevailed, and can hardly be brought into agreement with them. The attempt has frequently been made to reconcile the modes of thinking and speaking respecting divine influences, which were common in all antiquity, with the philosophical principles of our own day. But this attempt has not been very successful; and the entirely different methods which have been adopted by writers to effect this reconciliation are a sufficient proof of the difficulty of the undertaking. From the above remarks we may conclude 1. That since these conceptions are found to exist among all people, and to be everywhere very much alike, especially in the early stages of cultivation, they must be natural to the human mind, and result directly from its original constitution. 2. That if God has seen fit to make a direct revelation to any particular man or nation, he has accommodated himself in so doing to these original conceptions of the mind, and has, as it were, met them on the way in which they were coming towards him. This might be reasonably expected from the Divine wisdom and goodness; for how should a wise and good father deem it improper to adapt the instructions which he gives to his children in their education to their natural expectations, and to answer the demands of their minds? This shews us the reason why true inspiration, such as the apostles and prophets enjoyed, resembles so much in its external signs, how wide soever the internal difference may be, the false and imaginary inspiration to which the prophets and teachers of the heathen world pretended. The reason of this resemblance between real and pretended inspiration should be carefully noted, because the comparison of the two has been frequently turned to bad account. 3. That the explanations which are frequently given of those passages of the Bible which treat of inspiration cannot be true. Some modern writers explain away the sense of these passages till nothing seems to be left of literal inspira understood by their contemporary hearers and readers. II. Rude Nations believed Great Men to be Inspired. Nations in the first stages of improvement believe that everything which is great, which excites their wonder, or surpasses their comprehension, is the result of immediate divine agency, and overlook the second causes to which these effects are to be ascribed. Accordingly, they regard useful inventions, laws, and religious institutions, as gifts bestowed directly by God, and the distinguished men through whom these blessings are bestowed as the favourites and messengers of God, and therefore entitled to the highest reverence. This statement is abundantly proved from the mythology of the ancient nations, and especially of Greece. Through these men God was supposed to speak; and what they said was regarded as the word of God, and they themselves as holy or consecrated, as is implied in all the ancient languages. Thus minstrels and prophets were called by the ancient Greeks ayo and Seio, by the sacred writers o, D, 2 Kings, i. 9, ayını εov úv♪ρwño, 2 Pet. i. 21; also own, which, according to its Arabic etymology, would denote messengers, ambassadors, (of God.) The term SEоярóлоs (Homer, Iliad, XII. 228) signifies one who speaks in the place of God, vates. Cicero, Pro Archia Poeta, VIII., says that poets were supposed divina quodam spiritu inflari, and that they were, called sancti, quod quasi deorum aliquo dono atque munere commendati nobis esse videantur; and XII., that they semper apud omnes sancti sunt habiti atque dicti. Cf. Dresde, Proluss. duo de notione prophetæ in codice sacro, Wittenberg, 1788-89. Morus, P 20, 21. III. Great Men believed themselves to be Inspired. Those who felt themselves urged on to great and noble deeds, or irresistibly compelled to communicate their feelings to others, believed the impulses by which they were actuated to be supernatural, and that they were the organs through whom the Deity spake and acted. Many of the sages and philosophers of early antiquity expressed this belief respecting themselves; and to doubt their sincerity, or to sup pose that they made such pretensions, as artful politicians, for the purpose of deceiving their contemporaries, would betray great ignorance of the history of mankind. The minstrels and prophets among the ancient Greeks believed no less firmly than their hearers or readers that they were actuated by a divine impulse. This ap- the Latin, inspiratio, inspiratus, (a spirando,) pears evident from the writings of Homer. and spiritu divino instinctum esse, Livy, V. 15, What Cicero said, De Natura Deorum. II. 66, afflatus Dei, afflatum esse numine, inflari divino Nemo vir magnus sine aliquo afflatu divino un-spiritu, Cicero, Pro Archia Poeta, VIII. From quam fuit, was universally believed in all anti-this agreement in the terms by which the anquity. Accordingly, everything great and noble in the thoughts or actions of the ancient heroes, commanders, kings, and sages, all their great undertakings, their wars and victories, were ascribed to the Deity working in them as instruments of its own purposes. It appears, then, from Nos. II. III., that the teachers and prophets of the heathen world, as well as those of the Bible, both believed themselves and were believed by others to be inspired. And the question here naturally arises, whether the inspiration of the latter as well as that of the former may not have been feigned or imaginary. This question may be firmly answered in the negative, with reasons which are perfectly satisfactory to the unprejudiced inquirer. The teachers and prophets of the Bible were enabled, through the divine wisdom and goodness, to give such proof of the reality of their inspiration as those of the heathen world could never offer. IV. Different Nations agree in their Representations and Ideas of Inspiration. cient nations designated inspiration, we argue the agreement of their original ideas respecting it; and we conclude that these terms, when used in the Bible, must be understood to denote immediate divine influences, since this is the only sense in which they were used in the ancient world. Cf. s. 19, II., and s. 39, I. V. Inspired Men often spake what they did not understand. The ancient nations believed that one whose words and actions were thus under the divine influences, was himself, at the time of inspiration, merely passive. Mentes declares to Telemachus, Odyssey, I. 200, 201— ἐγὼ μαντεύσομαι, ὡς ἐνὶ θυμῷ Αθάνατοι βάλλουσι. Cf. Odyssey, XV. 172. They also believed that the soothsayer or minstrel did not himself understand, and could not explain to others, what he spake, or rather, what God spake through him, while he was inspired. This opinion was a natural consequence of the former. In conThe conceptions formed of the Deity in the formity with this general belief was the opinion early ages were extremely gross and sensual. of the Jews, as expressed in the Talmud, the Men in the savage state have always supposed prophets themselves did not, in many cases, underGod to possess a body, and every way to resem-stand the import of what they predicted. The ble themselves. Their conceptions respecting same opinion is expressed by Josephus and his influence would not, of course, be more re- Philo; and Peter says, 2 Pet. i. 20, popητeia fined than respecting his nature. In this parti-idías èxiλvoews où giveta. Vide s. 8. We find cular, as well as in many others, the ideas the same thing expressed in innumerable paswhich the human mind has entertained have sages of the Grecian writers. Plato, in his diabeen everywhere very much the same, as is logue repi Imádos ('Iwv), puts the prevailing proved by the agreement of various languages. notion of the Greeks into the mouth of SocraAlmost all the ancient nations ascribed the di- tes :-Κονφον χρήμα ποιητὴς ἐστὶ, καὶ πτηνὸν, καὶ vine induence, by which the confidents of hea- ἱερόν· καὶ οὐ πρότερον οἷόστε ποιεῖν πρὶν ἂν ἔνθεός ven were inspired to speak or act, to the word τε γένηται καὶ ἔκφρων, καὶ ὁ νοῦς μηκέτι ἐν αὐτῷ or mouth of God, or to the breath proceeding out ἐνῇ. ἕως δ ̓ ἂν τουτὶ ἔχῃ τὸ κτῆμα, ἀδύνατος πᾶν of his mouth ; and they accordingly regarded this ποιεῖν ἐστὶν ἀνθρωπος, καὶ Χρησμῳδεῖν . . . . οὐ divine infuence itself as literally inspiration. γὰρ τέχνη ταῦτα λέγουσιν, ἀλλὰ θείᾳ δυνάμει All this is shewn by the language employed to ὁ Θεὸς, ἐξαιρούμενος τούτων νοῦν, τούτοις χρῆται designate their ideas. Vide John, xx. 22. The ύπηρέταις, καὶ τοῖς χρησμῳδοῖς, καὶ τοῖς μάντεσι oracles of the prophets were called among the τοῖς θείοις· ἵνα ἡμεῖς οἱ ἀκούοντες εἰδῶμεν ὅτι οὐχ Hebrews της D, το 1927, 1; among the Greeks, ούτοι εἰσὶν οἱ ταῦτα λέγοντες, οὕτω πολλού άξια, φήμη, φάσις, λόγιον. and among the Romans, ora- οἷς νοὺς μὴ πάρεστιν, ἀλλ ̓ ὁ Θεός ἐστιν ὁ λέγων. cula, derived, according to Cicero, from ore sive dià TovTwv dè qdéɣyeza яpòs nuas. "The poet oratione Deorum. And these divine influences | cannot compose, nor the soothsayer prophesy, are expressed in all the ancient languages by unless he is inspired by the Deity, and transterms which literally designate blowing, breath-ported, as it were, beyond himself. He then ing, breathing upon, &c.; in the Hebrew, loses sight of the rules of art, and is borne away min, Drabe min, wap man, may ne mn; in the Greek, by the divine impulse. The Deity deprives πνέω, ἐμπνέω, πνεύμα άγιον οι Θεοῦ, ἔμπνευσις, him of his own consciousness and reflection, iniлvoia Dov, also Seónvεvoros, 2 Tim. iii. 16, and employs him as an ambassador. It is not (vide s. 8;) sometimes, haλeiv év яvevμazi eoù he who speaks, but God who speaks through him." for δεόπνευστον εἶναι, οι ἐπίπνοιαν Θεοῦ ἔχειν· in | True inspiration is described in very much the same way, Mark, xiii. 11. Again, Plato says in his dialogue ɛpi 'Apetñs (Mévwv), 'Opus àv καλοῦμεν θείους, οἵτινες νοῦν μὴ ἔχοντες, πολλὰ καὶ μεγάλα κατορθοῦσιν ὧν πράττουσι καὶ λέγουσι, "poets and prophets are justly called divine, because while they declare important things, they themselves do not understand what they say." In the Odyssey, I. 347-350, Telemachus thus checks Penelope in attempting to control the bard, Μῆτερ ἐμὴ, τί τ' ἀρ' ἀῦ φθονέεις ερίηρον ἀοιδὸν Phemius declares, ODYSSEY, XXII. 346, Αὐτοδίδακτος δ' εἰμί· Θεός δέ μοι ἐν φρεσὶν οἶμας Παντοίας ἐνέφυσεν. to employ music and song as a means of exciting and increasing inspiration. Elisha did the same, 2 Kings, iii. 15. And the members of the schools of the prophets were ever engaged in these exercises, 1 Sam. x. 5, seq. SECTION X. OF THE VARIOUS THEORIES RESPECTING THE MANNER AND DEGREES OF INSPIRATION. I. The Theory that Inspiration in the highest sense was extended equally to all Scripture. THE theory that the divine assistance which the sacred writers experienced extended to everything which they wrote, words and letters not excepted, is doubtless one of the oldest in the Christian church. In this view of the subject, In the Sybilline Oracles, an inspired speaker the sacred writers were merely the scribes or says, οὔτε γὰρ οἶδα, 'Ο τι λέγω, κέλεται δ' ὁ Θεὸς τὰ ἕκαστ' ἀγορεύειν. So it is said respecting Balaam, (Num. xxiii. 5,) that the Lord put words into his mouth. The ancient minstrels and poets, in whose productions art had as yet no share, were called simply ἀοιδοί and δῖοι ἀοιδοί. So they are always called in Homer. The word nonths is of later origin, and was unknown until poetry had become an art. Cf. Scripta Varii argumenti, p. 28, 29, ed. 2. VII. Inspiration described by terms indicating Violence. The impulse which is felt by those who are inspired is commonly very strong and irresistible. They often betray their emotion by an unusual strength of voice, and very violent bodily movements; hence, in all the ancient languages the terms which designate the words and actions of those who are inspired convey the idea of violence of mental feeling and bodily action-e. g., opun (impetus), ¿puaóuar. Those who were inspired were said, corripi, agitari Deo, xaréxeodai ix Oɛoù, pépɛodai, (2 Pet. i. 21), pati Deum; and inspiration itself was called furor divinus, pavía (μaivsodai.) Accordingly, the words which in the ancient languages signify to predict, generally signify too, to rage, to act like a madman, insanire—e. g., vaticinari in Latin, and in Hebrew Nan, 1 Sam. xviii. 10. The impulses attending inspiration were likewise represented in the writings of the Asiatics as a spiritual and sacred intoxication; because they transported a man beyond himself, and strained and elevated all the powers of his soul. Hence the figurative language employed, Luke, i. 15; Ephes. v. 18. The ancient prophets and poets, as we see from Homer, were accustomed amanuenses, of the Holy Spirit; and were often compared by the ancients to flutes, upon which the Spirit of God played. This comparison is found in the writings of Justin, Athenagoras, Macarius, and other fathers; and also of the modern theologians, Musæus, Baier, Quenstedt, and even of Schubert, in the middle of the eighteenth century. This theory accords very well in many respects with the mode of thought and conception which prevailed in the ancient world, (vide s. 9;) but it is very unlike the ideas which are entertained on the subject of inspiration at the present day. But it is still more important to remark respecting it, that the sacred writers themselves never profess to have enjoyed, while writing, inspiration of such a nature. And that they were not in reality the mere organs of the Divine Spirit, whatever may have been supposed by their contemporaries, must appear from a moment's observation. For (1) we find that each of the writers of the Bible has his own peculiar style, which perfectly distinguishes him from all the rest. It has indeed been said, that the Holy Spirit accommodated himself to the style of each particular writer; but the one who dictates is not wont to accommodate himself to the style of the amanuensis. (2) The manner in which the sacred writers treat the subjects which they introduce, the costume with which they invest them, is often, notwithstanding the dignity and excellence of the subjects themselves, rude and unpolished, and such as might be expected from illiterate and uncultivated writers. This trait, at least in their writings, must be ascribed to their own agency. (3) In many cases the inspired writers evidently made use of the productions of others: the evangelists composed their histories in part from the previous accounts of the life of Jesus; the later prophets, Ezekiel and Jeremiah, frequently borrowed from the been able to agree in deciding how many degrees of inspiration there were, or in what way they should be defined; nor is it probable that, on these points, they will ever perfectly agree, since the inspired writers have left them undecided, and we are unable to determine with respect to objects which lie so wholly beyond the circle of our experience. The following are some of the principal attempts that have been made to determine the manner and degrees of inspiration: oracles of Isaiah, &c. (4) The sacred histo- | some of the ancients; but theologians have never rians frequently appealed to the evidence of their own senses for the facts which they relate, to the testimony of others, to the records from which they derived their information, and to their own investigations, (Luke, i. 1 ;) from all which it appears that they were not passive under the divine influences, and that they were not miraculously endowed with any knowledge which they could obtain in the diligent use of their own intellectual powers, since God does not work miracles when they are unnecessary. (5) They frequently speak in their own names, send greetings, mention their private affairs (2 Tim. iv. 13, seq.), &c. (6) In some cases they themselves make a distinction between their own advice and the express command of God, or of Christ, 1 Cor. vii. 25, coll. v. 40; 2 Cor. viii. 10. 1. Some theologians are contented with the general position, that there are different degrees of inspiration, and do not think proper to determine under what particular degree any given passage was written. They go no further than to say, that in writing on subjects of the first importance, in communicating facts which could According to the conceptions of the ancient have been learned only from revelation, and in world, (vide s. 9,) the very words employed cases where there was peculiar liability to miswere in some cases, though not always, inspired; take, the sacred writers enjoyed the highest deand by many writers, both of ancient and mo- gree of divine influence-the inspiration of words dern times, the inspiration of the Bible has (inspiratio verbalis); but that in treating of subbeen thought to extend even to the words injects of inferior interest-for example, of those which it was written. This opinion is advo- of a merely historical nature-they enjoyed no cated by Ernesti, Neue Theol. Bibliothek, b. iii.higher assistance than was necessary to secure s. 468, ff. The argument which he used, and which is commonly urged, is this: thoughts cannot be clearly communicated to the mind without words; and therefore the latter, as well as the former, must have been given to the inspired writers by the Holy Spirit. But I may obtain a person to write a book under my superintendence and direction; I may communicate to him the ideas to be expressed, furnish him with all the materials of the composition, and suggest, whenever it is necessary, particular words; and all this without dictating to him every syllable and letter to be employed: I may leave him, under my close supervision, to execute the work in his own way. So Paul might have been left by the Spirit to pursue his own method in shewing that the Mosaic institute must be abolished. But in other cases it seems to be necessary that the Holy Spirit should have communicated the very words in which the things revealed should be expressed; as, for example, in certain numbers, or names of persons and places, which could not have been known except from revelation. Vide Morus, p. 35, n. 6. Considerations like these prepared the way for the views which follow. II. The Theory that Inspiration was extended in different degrees to different portions of Scripture. This theory was adopted in order to avoid the difficulties resulting from the former. In this view of the subject, the degrees of inspiration vary with the character of the writer and the nature of the subject. This was believed by them against error, to refresh their recollection with the knowledge which they had before acquired, or perhaps to give the first impulse to speak or write. These views of inspiration were entertained by Michaelis, Döderlein, and others. Calixtus thought that it was sufficient to say, in general terms, that the sacred writers were secured by divine influence against the possibility of mistake. Cf. Morus, p. 36, s. 29, n. 7. But considering that we are unable, at the present time, to determine how much the sacred writers knew respecting the several subjects of which they have treated, from their own unaided study, and how much from the direct teaching of the Holy Spirit, none of the theologians above mentioned have attempted to define accurately the degree of inspiration under which particular portions of holy writ were composed. 2. Other theologians have denied that all the books of the Bible were inspired, or that the whole of the inspired books was written under special divine assistance. Those who have entertained this opinion may be subdivided into different classes. Some go so far as to say, that some parts of a book may be of divine origin, while other parts of the same book are of human origin only, and must therefore be care fully distinguished from the former. If we ask, now, which parts-of the epistle to the Romans, for example-are divine and which human, we shall receive various answers. Henry Holden, as cited by Richard Simon, would say, that only those parts were to be received as inspired which the sacred writers |