is not so much the question, "Is the Bible from God?" as, "Is it altogether from God?" And this has to be fairly and fully met and answered. Many, who admit that it is God's revelation to man, deny that it embodies that revelation in a form of absolute purity; and contend it contains a mixture of human errors, which have to be eliminated from that which is Divine: in other words, that the Bible rather contains, than is, the Word of God.

It will be seen at once that it is a most vital question, and one which admits of no compromise. It is evident that he who contends that only those parts of scripture are inspired which he deems important for moral and religious ends, has a different Bible from those who receive the scriptures as inspired and infallible throughout. His is partly fallible; theirs contains throughout the true sayings of God. His contains much that is unimportant; theirs contains nothing that has not a divine significance, and a real value. His requires some verifying faculty to be added to scripture, to discern between the divine and the human; theirs takes the scriptures as being complete and self-contained, neither admitting nor requiring any discriminating process in order to separate the divine from the human; but believing them to be divine throughout, demands that its readers should place themselves before them in the position of docile learners and submissive disciples.

Besides, it is in vain to profess reverence and admiration for those parts of scripture which are deemed important, if the remainder be treated as of comparatively inferior value and authority. For what is it that has given its importance to the passages that are thus singled out? By what means has it been arrived at that they are divine, and other passages contiguous thereto only partly divine, and others, again, altogether human? Have they not been summoned to the bar of human judgment as well as all the rest, so that the truth they contain is divine only by virtue of the human opinion which so pronounced it? The attitude assumed is that of acquiescence and approval-not that of simple faith. The utterance has given satisfaction, but it does not rule and govern as an oracle of God: and having been thus lowered to the position of an equal, it is futile to pretend to regard it as a superior, having power to judge the conscience and rule the soul.

Such is the simple issue of the question now before us. It concerns not the learned

only: it has a most intimate connection with the vitality of our faith as Christans. No one can entertain low views on the subject of Inspiration, or remain content with vague and uncertain views respecting it, without loss and injury. In proportion as the Divine Majesty, and the Divine Wisdom, and the Divine Authority of scripture are obscured or unfelt by the reader, his use of scripture is impaired. It has lost much of its power to strengthen and elevate the soul. Its utterances are no longer quickening, giving an overcoming power over self and sin and the world. The sword of the Spirit is blunted, both as a weapon of offence and defence; and perhaps it is not too much to say, that the low standard of personal and experimental religion current among nearly all sections of the Christian church, is mainly owing to the want of a full recognition of the divine authority and GOVERNING power of every part of the Word of God, just as the existing differences among Christians on matters of belief and practice may be traced to the

same sources.

Nothing has been more perplexing and harrassing to sincere inquirers on this subject than the concessions that have been made by eminent divines in order to meet the objections of the opponents of plenary inspiration. The assaults of sceptics can be understood, and are expected, but when evangelical ministers of note are found making suicidal admissions on the subject of inspiration, to meet the daring attacks that are made upon the truth of Scripture, the minds of those who have little time and opportunity to investigate the subject for themselves are necessarily unsettled thereby. Like Israel of old, they seek to steady the ark of God by unauthorized means, instead of simply carrying it as prescribed. In saying this we do not for an instant impugn the motives of those to whom we thus refer; nor, on the other hand, do we advocate an obstinate adherence to an untenable position for fear of appearing to encourage error, or from a timid compliance with the prejudices of a party. Nothing is really gained by contending against facts, or suppressing truth on any subject. Still, making all allowance for the desire to gain over the opponents of the full Inspiration of Scripture, it is to be feared that the usual result of the concessions adverted to has been, that they have been treated as evidences of a weak and failing cause, and turned into arguments for demanding still

further concessions in the same direction. Thus, after the verbal Inspiration of Scripture has been given up as an untenable theory, the erroneousness of some of its statements of physical fact has been conceded. The untrustworthiness of some of its historical narratives has next been admitted, and then " errors of reasoning, owing to imperfect knowledge," have been reluctantly owned, until at length nothing really inspired, and therefore really true and authoritative, has remained but what is vaguely called the essence" of scripture, or its moral and religious truth. Many of the writers to whom we allude have stopped far short of the bottom of this inclined plane; but in most cases they have saved their orthodoxy at the expense of their consistency; and while appreciating to the full the stand they have made, we have often wondered how they maintained a position so dangerous and unsafe.

cr

The question of Inspiration is not merely one between the christian and the infidel. It has become a matter of dispute in the Christian camp itself. The most unscrupulous attacks on the Old Testament Scriptures, especially, have been made by those who wear the christian name and who occupy positions of eminence in the professing church, and young men in colleges and even some connected with dissenting churches and sabbath-schools, have been fascinated by their eloquence and awed by their learning to endorse their pernicious theories The voice of the Church of Christ in past ages, the views of good men in every age, are boldly set aside to make room for those advanced views in reference to the Inspiration of Scripture which virtually set aside its authority as a standard of appeal in matters of faith and practice.

There are many, however, who hold the scriptures in reverent regard, who desire to uphold their authority to the fullest extent, and who accept all the matter they contain as true, without reserve or hesitation, who nevertheless shrink from asserting that they are verbally inspired in every part and portion. They see difficulties in the way they think that the opponents of Inspiration may be best met by not insisting on what they term "the verbal theory;" and they substitute views which they think more tenable and more in accordance with the facts of the case. Many writers of eminence, whose orthodoxy is unimpeachable, have striven to show that verbal Inspiration is an antiquated tenet, encumbered with serious

difficulties, and must therefore be abandoned by those who would hope successfully to cope with the enemies of scripture. We need not mention names; leading divines, both in and out of the Church of England, have taken this view; and assuredly it is with no thought of measuring ourselves against their ability and learning that we venture to take the opposite. But truth is personal, and cannot be held by proxy. It needs, therefore, that every one should be fully persuaded in his own mind on a subject like the present; and, not by disregarding, but by carefully considering the views of others, to seek to arrive at a just and valid conclusion.

We seek, in the short series of papers now commenced, to do nothing more than lay before the reader a few of the considerations which have induced us to believe and to maintain that Biblical Inspiration is verbal in its character, and relates not simply to the matter of scripture, but to the very words in which that matter is conveyed. Our object will be gained if we stimulate attention to the subject on the part of those who are, or may be, from their position and circumstances, brought into contact with the infidelity of the day; and this, because we are constrained to believe that the only effectual safeguard against the dangerous theories that are advocated on this subject is to be found in the view for which we contend. It is in vain to argue for the truth of scripture, if the language in which it is conveyed is divested of Inspiration. The truth is conveyed to us in writings which are made up of words; and if these are not inspired, the way is at least laid open for calling in question the truth which they convey to us.

These are the two primâ facie objections with which it is sought summarily to dismiss verbal Inspiration as unworthy of belief;

First, it is called a "theory" of Inspiration, and thus stigmatized as a plausible scheme devised to explain the subject-some one mode, among others, by which it is sought to be defined and understood. Now, the charge of theorizing may be much more fairly brought against the views of our opponents. We disclaim all theory in the matter. Verbal Inspiration simply asserts that the words of the Bible are the words of God himself, and only takes the words"all scripture is given by inspiration of God" in their fair and obvious meaning, as we shall endeavour to show.

Again, the plenary Inspiration which extends to the very words of scripture, is called a 66 mechanical" view of the subject, and dismissed accordingly.; meaning, of course, to convey the idea that it supposes the inspired writers to have been unsympathising machines; whereas their writings are full of deep feeling, denoting the possession of deep emotions of joy or sorrow. But why the Inspiration of the words of their message should be inconsistent with their feeling it, it would be difficult to say. They were not mere copyists, or amanuenses. Their human minds were imbued with their theme; and while they were furnished with both matter and words by the Divine Wisdom, their human feelings were saturated with heavenly affections, and warmed with all the emotions suitable to the subject of their messages. The things they taught

they taught, as the apostle declares, "in words which the Holy Ghost teacheth," and felt the power and strength of the words thus employed.

But we must leave to another month the further consideration of this interesting and important subject. We propose to notice in order the positive arguments for the verbal Inspiration of the Scriptures, taken from the scriptures themselves, commencing with the noted passage2 Tim. iii. 16; and then the objections that have been made against it by various writers. We disclaim any originality in treating on this subject. We simply claim to exercise an independent judgment in regard to the views and facts which reading and reflection have supplied, which have appeared to us worthy of adoption. G. P.

SIN! What has it not done? Is there an evil which may not be traced to its prolific root? Is there a dark spot in the human character which it has not caused? Is there an ache in the head or grief in the heart which may not be traced to it? Is not every evil that has ever distressed and perplexed mankind a turbid stream from that polluted fountain? Would the holy hierarchy of heaven ever have suffered disruption without it, or would "Lucifer, son of the morning," ever have "fallen like lightning from heaven," if he had not sinned? Think of angelic rebellion ! Think of human apostacy! Think of "all the evils which flesh is heir to," and say if sin is not a monster! It made the bower of Eden fade. It filled Adam's breast with fear. It drove the guilty pair to seek a false refuge when they should have gone forth to "walk with God in the cool of the day." It cursed the ground of paradise, and smote the flowers that bloomed on the banks of the fast-flowing Hiddekel. It changed the waters of Gihon and Euphrates, and drove the once sinless ones from the garden of communion, and edged the tree of life with an ever-flaming sword. It made the blood run cold in human veins, and turned man back to the dust of the earth. Before "sin entered into the world, and death by sin," how sweet was Eden's fellowship? Man walked with God "in the climes of bliss." He walked with stately step by

"the river that went out of Eden to water the garden," and "saw the tree of life also in the midst of the garden," and "sat down under its shadow with great delight, and found its fruit sweet to his taste! But what has produced the sad vicissitude? What has effected the deplorable change? What has made man "a fugitive and a vagabond on the earth ?" How is it he "dwells in the land of Nod" (Heb. wandering), "seeking rest and finding none ?" How is it the vase is shattered, the tree barren,-the fruit sour, the leaf withered, -the waters bitter,—and the earth a wilderness? How is it there are Bacas, and Marahs, and Kibroth-Hattaavahs? Why is not the earth an Elim still, with more than "twelve wells of water," and with more than "threescore and ten palm trees?" Ah! there is but one answer to all these questions-sin! sin! sin! This has done it all. From the cottage to the mansion, from the hut to the throne, from the child to the veteran-with all the ills that can affect them all-sin is the pitiful, hateful cause. But the gospel speaks of One who hath "put away sin by the sacrifice of himself!" It still dwells, but is in subjection to him who "has all power in heaven and in earth;" and blessed are they to whom it may be said, "Sin shall not have dominion over you, for ye are not under the law, but under grace." W. FRITH.

Bexley Heath.