THE QUESTION OF THE DAY: SHALL WE KEEP THE BIBLE? Ir was a pleasing and re-assuring thing to find more than ten thousand of the English Clergy, on a recent occasion, prepared and willing to avow their conviction, in the face of many opponents, that the Bible "not only contains, but is, the Word of God." Still, however, the scepticism which has latterly shown itself in the Church of England, remains there, neither silenced nor abashed; while many of those who have long been ranked among the most orthodox of Christian professors, now astonish us by admissions and concessions which imperil the very foundation of our faith. As one instance of this, let us remark that the Quarterly Review, a journal read by thousands of the clergy, and by tens of thousands of the laity of the Church, in its 230th Number thus wrote :—

"Is there no escape from the alternative, of either denying, on the one side, the possibility of the presence of any error in the Scripture, or on the other, the certainty of its Divine inspiration? We believe that there is; and that it may be found in following the simple thought, that it was, properly speaking, the writers who were inspired, and not the book."

So that a supposed champion of the faith, when called on for his belief, is willing to admit that the Bible is not an inspired book; and that we have, in fact, no Word of God! This is one notable exhibition of the instability and uncertainty now observable on every side; but it is only a single instance of a very wide-spread evil. Almost every day that passes we have to mourn over the shortcomings and perilous concessions made by good men. Orthodox Churchmen are found giving up the only basis on which any kind of a church can be built; earnest Evangelicals are heard advancing suppositions which leave the very fact of the Atonement in doubt! In this state of things it seems absolutely necessary to make an attempt to draw the

line, and to show where concession ought to end, and a stubborn resistance begin. Truth is always one-consistent and simple in its assertions; error is generally hydra-headed; and in the present case we find a Stanley and a Jowett fighting essentially the same battle in this century which Voltaire and Paine fought in the last; although the forms of the temptation are as various as the shapes and hues of the passing clouds.

The central truth for which we have now to contend, is, that we have a Word of God. Not a shapeless, evanescent, impalpable something; but a tangible and positive fact-a written and well-known document. So speaks the Bible itself" The law of the Lord is perfect, converting the soul; the testimony of the Lord is sure, making wise the simple; the statutes of the Lord are right, rejoicing the heart; the commandment of the Lord is pure, enlightening the eyes." (Psa. xix.) (Psa. xix.) This is language only applicable to a known, tangible, and unquestionable writing or document; it could have no meaning if applied to a merely human work, in which Divine communications were believed to be somewhere hidden. In the same tone speaks St. Paul, who describes the Divine books as "the oracles of God" (Rom. iii.), and declares that "all Scripture is given by God's inspiration." So also St. Peter, who declares that "holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost."

Here, however, we are often stopped by the inquiry, "What is your theory of inspiration ?" To which we reply, that we have no other theory than that which is conveyed in the opening words of the epistle to the Hebrews; where we are told that "God at sundry times, and in divers manners, spake in times past to the fathers by the prophets." Since we are distinctly told that He spake "in divers manners," we are not going to assert that He spoke in only one manner. But the great and vital truth which it concerns us to notice and to receive is this, that "God spoke." He spoke through His prophets, that our fathers and we might hear and obey His word. Now, it deeply concerns us to receive this statement loyally, and without any reservation. "God spoke;" His words were conveyed, first by speech, and then by writing. That writing we have; and it differs from all other writings in being His word. In it we have the very "Word of God."

But do we claim this rank and estimation for every syllable in our English Bible? This introduces the question of, What limitations and reservations may lawfully be used in speaking of the Bible as "the Word of God?"

The writers of the books of the Old and New Testaments were God's secretaries. He used them as kings and rulers use their secretaries now. No king permits his secretary to write in his name anything of which he does not wholly approve.

This rule holds good with far more certainty in God's case; for He ever was, and is, Omniscient and Almighty. None of His secretaries could write a syllable in His name without His knowledge; nor could He ever want power to make His instruments work His will with precision and exactitude. Even sceptics like Bishop Colenso admit that, in some way or other, "God spoke" in the books of Scripture, and that it was His will and purpose to counsel and direct men by those books. We accept the admission, and we say, therefore, that since the books of the Bible were, in some sense, a work of God, they must be perfect and infallible. "He is the rock: His work is perfect." (Deut. xxxii. 4.) "My word, that goeth out of my mouth, shall not return to me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it." (Isa. lv. 11.)

"But there is a human element," it is said, "discernible throughout Scripture." Undoubtedly there is. When a king employs two secretaries, an observant eye will remark the difference between the papers written by the one and those written by the other. Each will have his own style, his own handwriting, his own turn of thought and expression. Yet, while all this can be discerned, he who receives a letter from the secretary of a wise and prudent king, well knows that its whole contents and purport are really and truly the word of the Sovereign, and not of the secretary. So it is in the case of the Bible. No one who entertains worthy thoughts of God can doubt that, in these communications to man, every word and thought was perfectly given, and conveyed to the hearer and reader exactly what God purposed to convey.

But the original documents no longer exist. This is unquestionably true; and this fact gives room and scope for legitiinate criticism. We have, at present, only copies made from copies, which copies were themselves made from other copies, two or three thousand years ago. And in translations we have a second opening for inaccuracy; since, to make a perfect translation of a large and very ancient writing, is a work which exceeds any known human powers.

Errors in copying, and other errors in translating, may, then, have crept in; and this fact affords an abundant scope for loyal and reverent investigation. God has not preserved His Word from all error; to have done this, would have amounted to a perpetual miracle; and by miracles He does not now work. But He has preserved it by His Providence from any material error; and this is a wonderful fact. Among hundreds and thousands of private and unimportant errors of the copyist, not one of the least importance has ever been pointed out-not one which confuses or obscures the Divine message in the least degree. He who watches over the sparrows, and feeds

the young ravens, and numbers the hairs of our heads, has so guarded His Word as to keep it substantially intact and uninjured; and this, without that supernatural perfectness which would have been a visible miracle.

The great fact, then, at which we arrive, may be thus set forth-We have a book, or collection of books, which are, in the whole, and in each and every part, the Word of Godgiven to man by the agency of certain chosen messengers, who spoke, in every word and every syllable, "as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." This Word, however, has been handed down to us by successive copyists, who have been kept, in God's Providence, from any material error, but not from trivial and insignificant variations. And it is given to men of the present age by the hands of translators, who are or were men like ourselves, and who often fall into errors of their own, which are to be corrected by many renewed examinations of the ancient text. Such we believe to be the true and only tenable belief as to the real character and authority of the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament.

We come now to the opposing view, or rather to the multifarious views, promulgated by sceptics of various shades and characters. While Truth is essentially one, error is always multitudinous. And in the present case we have a long gradation of scepticism, from the rampant infidelity of Voltaire and Paine, down to the moderated unbelief of Belsham and Aspland, and, at last, to the refined and learned doubts and difficulties of Dr. Colenso, and the writers of Essays and Reviews. There may be a prodigious difference between the tone and manner of a declared enemy of Christianity, who delights in pouring contumely on God's Word, and the courteous and moderated diction of a calm and studious sceptic; but the final result is the same. A Paine may utter ribaldries and blasphemies when speaking of the books of Moses, while a Colenso may only doubt whether Moses ever wrote those books, or whether one-half of their statements can be believed; but the effect on the hearer's or reader's mind will be substantially the same. If he gives credit to the sceptic, he ceases to believe in the Bible. He gives up all confidence in the fact that we have a Word of God; he has, in short, a Divine Revelation no longer.

The different stages, or methods, by which the infidelity of the last century has been "toned down" in the present day may be thus described :

I. We had the vehement animosity of the days of Voltaire; when the Bible was openly declared to be a forgery and a fraud, -a wicked and immoral book.

2. This, however, disgusted men, and did the cause of infidelity more harm than good. Hence we next had the more

refined scepticism of Unitarianism and German Rationalism. The Hebrew and Greek Scriptures were now admitted to be ancient writings, and to possess many claims to respect and veneration. Still, they were only to be ranked with the writings of Homer and Plato, and were handled by critics with equal freedom.

3. Up to this point, however, the attacks upon Scripture came from without. Such a thing as a declaration of scepticism issuing from the bosom of the Church of England was scarcely dreamed of, and if an isolated instance of the kind now and then occurred, it was treated as the vagary of a man of unsound intellect. About five years ago this reverent abstinence was terminated by the appearance of the Essays and Reviews; followed, after a short delay, by the publications of Bishop Colenso. Here we found beneficed clergymen, and even a prelate of the Church, questioning, though with many professions of diffidence and respect, the truth of the miracles and prophecies of the Bible, the credibility of the Scripture account of the creation, and at last the historic character of the Pentateuch itself. Thus, under the guise of "criticism," men who still called themselves Christians did as fully and effectually set themselves to destroy the whole basis of the Christian faith, as did Voltaire and Paine in their avowed and virulent hostility. 4. One more stage remained, and that was a more insidious and perilous one than either of the former. Within the last year or two several writers have appeared, especially among the clergy of the Church, whom it would be wrong to class with infidels, either of the flagrant or of the more moderate kind. Most of these "know not what they do," and err from constitutional timidity and hesitation. They have an innate horror of "going to extremes," and hence they shrink from the thought of "verbal inspiration." They search about for some middle-course ;-some theory by which the Bible shall be deemed to be inspired, in the main, but not wholly. Certainly, they admit, it is God's Word, and yet it would be too much to say that every word contained in it was inspired by God. This hesitating, vacillating, half-hearted spirit is shown in a multitude of different ways. Many years ago Coleridge wrote in his "Confessions :".

"In the books of Moses, and once or twice in the prophecies of Jeremiah, I find it asserted that not only the words were given, but the recording of the same enjoined by the special command of God, and doubtless executed under the special guidance of the Divine Spirit. As to all such passages, therefore, there can be no dispute. Whatever is referred by the sacred penman to a direct communication from God, I receive with full belief."

Coleridge deemed himself, and was deemed by others, a defender, and not an assailant, of the truth of Holy Scripture.