this section teaches —

3d. That all the canonical Scriptures were divinely inspired, and are thus given us as an authoritative rvle of faith and practice.

The books of Scripture were written by the instrumentality of men, and the national and personal peculiarities of their authors have been evidently as freely expressed in their writing, and their natural faculti(«i,

intellectual and moral, as freely exercised in their production, as those of the authors of any other writings. Nevertheless, these books are, one and all, in thought and verbal expression, in substance and form, wholly the Word of God, conveying, with absolute accuracy and divine authority, all that God meant them to convey, without any human additions or admixtures. This was accomplished by a supernatural influence of the Spirit of God acting upon the spirits of the sacred writers, called 'inspiration," which accompanied them uniformly in what they wrote, and which, without violating the free operation of their faculties, yet directed them in all they wrote and secured the infallible expression of it in words. The nature of this divine influence we, of course, can no more understand than we can in the case of any other miracle. But the eifects are plain and certain, viz.: that all written under it is the very Word of God, of infallible truth and of divine authority; and this infallibility and authority attach as well to the verbal expression in which the revelation is conveyed as to the matter of the revelation itself.

The fact that the Scriptures are thus inspired is proved, because they assert it of themselves; and because they must either be credited as true in this respect, or rejected as false in all respects ; and because God authenticated the claims of their writers by accompany* ing their teaching with *^ signs and wonders and divers miracles." Heb. ii. 4. Wherever God sends his "sign," there he commands belief, but it is impossible that he could unconditionally command belief except to truth infallibly conveyed.

(a.) The Old Testament writers claimed to be inspired. Deut. xxxi. 19-22, xxxiv. 10; Num. xvi. 28, 29; 2 Sam. xxiii. 2. As a characteristic fact, they speak in the name of God, prefacaug their messages with a ''Thus saith the Lord," "The mouth of the Lord hath spoken it." Dent, xviii. 21, 22; 1 Kings xxi. 20; Jer. ix. 12, etc.

(6.) The New Testament writers introduce their quotations from the Old Testament with such formulas as " The Holy Ghost saith," Heh. iii. 7 ; " The Holy Ghost this signifying," Heb. ix. 8 ; " Saith God," Acts ii. 17 ; 1 Cor. ix. 9, 10 ; " The Lord by the mouth of his servant David saith," Acts iv. 25 ; " The Lord limiteth in David a certain time, saying," Heb. iv. 7.

(c.) The inspiration of the Old Testament is expressly affirmed in the New Testament. Luke i. 70; Heb. i. 1 ; 2 Tim. iii. 16 ; 1 Pet. i. 10-12 ; 2 Pet. i. 21.

(d.) Christ and his apostles constantly quote the Old Testament as infallible, as that which must be fulfilled. Matt. V. 18; John vii. 2,3; Luke xxiv. 44; Matt. ii. 15-23, etc.

(e.) Inspiration was promised the apostles. Matt. x. 19; xxviii. 19, 20; Luke xii. 12; John xiii. 20; xiv.' 26; XV. 26. 27; xvi. 13.

(/.) They claimed to have the Spirit in fulfilment of the promise of Christ. Acts ii. 33 ; xv. 28 ; 1 Thess. i. 5. To speak as the prophets of God. 1 Cor. iv. 1 ; 1 Thess. iv. 8. To speak with plenary authority. 1 Cor. ii. 13; 2 Cor. xiii. 2-4; Gal. i. 8, 9. They put their writings on a level with the Old Testament Scriptures. 2 Pet. iii. 16 ; 1 Thess. v. 27.

These sections relate to the true canon, and the divine inspiration of the Holy Scriptures. In opposition to the Romish Church, which reckons the apocryphal books of equal authority with the Scriptures, it is asserted that these books are no part of the canon of the Scripture ; and in opposition to the Deists, who deny that the Scriptures of the Old and New

8 CONFESSION OP FAITH. QciIAP, I.

Testaments are the Word of God, it is affirmed that all the sacred books are given by inspiration of God.

The term Scriptures signifies writings in general, but is appropriated to the Word of God, which is also, by way of eminency, called the Bible, or 600^, because it is incomparably the best of all books. The sacred books are divided into the Old Testament and the New Testament. The former includes those books which were written under the old dispensation of the covenant of grace, or prior to the incarnation of the Son of God; the latter includes those books which were written after the commencement of the neto dispensation, or posterior to the advent of Christ. The Apostle Paul lays a foundation for this distinction ; for he uses the phrases Old Testament and New Testament, and in one instance designates the writings of JNIoses and the prophets by the former title. — 2. Cor. iii. 14. The word canon literally signifies a rule, and was early used to designate the Inspired Scriptures, which form a perfect rule of faith and life.

The Sacred Scriptures are now collected into one volume, but that volume contains a considerable number of separate books, written by different persons, and in different ages. How, then, do we ascertain the authenticity and genuineness of each of these books, and why do we receive them as canonical, to the exclusion of all others ? In determining a question of this kind, we must employ the same method which we follow when the genuineness of any other book is the subject of investigation. How do we know that the books which bear the names of Homer, Horace, Tacitus, and Livy were really composed by them, but by the uniform testimony of all succeeding ages ? In the same way do we ascertain that the writings of the Apostles and Evangelists are genuine ; Ave have the testimony of their contemporaries and immediate successors, who are the most competent witnesses in this case. The task of searching the records of antiquity has been undertaken by learned men, and executed with great industry and zeal. The result of their inquiries is, that the books now included in the New Testament were received as inspired by the primitive Church, and numerous passages were quoted from them by the earliest Christian writers ; that catalogues of these books, which coincide with ours, are inserted in the works of different authors who flourished in the third and fourth centuries ; and that these books were publicly read in Christian congregations, and were continually appealed to by Christian writers, as the standard of faith, and the supreme

judge of controversies. The canon of the Old Testament is ascertained by a short process, — we know that the Jews arranged their sacred books into three classes, the Law, the Prophets, and the Hagiogi-aphy, or holy writings. Now, our Lord, just before his ascension, thus addressed his disciples,— " These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms concerning me." — Luke xxiv. 44. The Psalms are here put for the Hagiography, probably because they were the principal book, or occupied the first place in that division. Our Lord, by adopting this common division of the sacred books, which comprehended all the Hebrew Scriptures, ratified the canon of the Old Testament, as it was received by the Jews. This, however, does not determine what particular books were then included in the Sacred Volume ; but on this point we have th.e testimony of the Jewish historian, Josephus, who indeed does not name the books of the Old Testament, but he numbers them, and so describes them that there is scarcely room for any mistake. His testimony is corroborated by that of several of the early Christian fathers, who have furnished us with catalogues of the books of the Old Testament, from which it appears, that the canon then existing was the same as that which we now possess. Besides, a Greek translation of the Old Testament, known by the name of The Septuagint, was made tAvo hundred and seventy years before the Christian era, in which are the same books that are at present found in the Hebrew copies.

The books commonly called Apocrypha, were never admitted int'o the list of canonical books, imtil the Council of Trent, at its fourth session, 1546, placed them in the same rank with the inspired writings. They are rejected by the Protestant Churches for the following reasons : — The Jews, to whom the oracles of God were committed, and who were n-ever blamed for unfaithfulness to their trust, never acknowledged these books to be of divine authority. They were not written in the Hebrew, but in the Greek language, and the authors of them were posterior to Malachi, in whom, according to the universal testimony of the Jews, the spirit of prophecy ceased. No part of these books is quoted by Christ or his apostles, nor a single Avord found in all the New Testament from which it can be inferred that such books were in existence. These books contain many things erroneous, superstitious, and immoral ; and some of the writers, instead of advancing a claim to inspiration, acknowledge

10 CONFESSION OF FAITH. fCHAP. I.

their own weakness, and apologise for their defects. The Church of England, though she does not receive the apocryphal books as canonical Scripture, and therefore does not " apply them to establisli any doctrine," yet she directs certain portions of them to be read in the chui'ch, " for example of life, and instruction of manners." Now, as these portions are read promiscuously with the lessons taken from the canonical books, and no notice is given to the people that they are selected from the Apocrypha, they are in reality undistinguished from the inspired writings ; and however good and instructive these apocryphal lessons may be, it never can be justified that they should thus be put on a level with the Word of God.

The Holy Scripture is called the Word of God, because it is given by inspiration of God. " The possibility of inspiration seems to be granted by all who profess to be Christians, though there is a great diversity of opinion with respect to its nature and degrees, as applied to the Scriptures. Some are of opinion that the inspiration of the Scriptures amounted to nothing more than a mere superintendence over the mjnds of the sacred writers, so as to prevent them from publishing gross errors. Others go a little further, and maintain that, besides superintendence, the understandings of the several writers were enlarged, — that their conceptions were elevated above the measure of ordinary men, — and that with their minds thus elevated, they were left to their own judgment both as to matter and words. The advocates of plenary inspiration, again, maintain that the Holy Spirit suggested to the minds of the persons inspired not only the matter to be communicated, but also the words in which the communication was to be made. A fourth party are for taking in all these supposed kinds of inspiration now mentioned ; and they maintain that the sacred writers sometimes wi'ote under mere superintendence, sometimes under superintendence accompanied with a high elevation of conception, and at other times under a divine suggestion, or what is called plenary inspiration, according to the nature of the subject on which they wrote." *

At no remote period, the plenary and verbal inspiration of the Scriptures was very generally abandoned. Events, however, have occurred of late years, which have occasioned a more thorough investigation of the subject ; and the most eminent writers who have treated of it more lately, maintain the plenary inspiration of the sacred books in opposition to tl?bse who hold that it was merely partial and occasional, * Stevenson on the Offices of Christ, p. 50-51.

and their verbal inspiration, in opposition to those who hold that only the sentiments or matter, and not the words, are inspired. " We are humbly of opinion," says Dr Stevenson, " that inspiration, as employed in communicating the sacred oi'acles to men, is only of one kind, and that this is the inspiration of suggestion, according to which not only the matter, but the words also, were communicated to the minds of the sacred wiiters. 1. The Scriptures themselves take notice of only one kind of inspiration, and represent it as extending to all the parts of Scripture, — to those which are historical and moral, as well as to those which are prophetical and doctrinal.— 2 Tim. iii. 16, 17 ; 2 Pet. i. 21. 2. There must have been more than an enlargement of the understanding, and an elevation of conception in inspiration, since a gi'eat many of the things were such as could not have entered into the hearts of men or of angels, had they not been suggested to the mind by the Divine Spirit. Of this description were the events foretold by the sacred writers many years before they took place, and the whole of the doctrines that relate to the supernatural plan of man's redemption.— 1 Cor. ii. 9, 10. 3. For similar reasons we must insist for the suggestion not only of tlie ideas, but also of the words of Scripture. To us it is altogether inconceivable how the sacred writers, who, like other men, were accustomed to think in words, could have the ideas suggested to their own minds, except in words ; or hoAv they could have written intelligibly about future events, with which they could have had no previous acquaintance, and on doctrinal subjects, far above theii' comprehension, had not the language, as well as the matter, been furnished to them by Divine suggestion. — 1 Cor. ii. 13. 4. If Avhat has been called the inspiration of superintendence a.nd elevation, could in any case be deemed to have been sufficient, it must have been in cases where the sacred writers may be supposed to have had a prior acquaintance, from other sources, with the subjects on v^'liich they were called to write ; such as subjects of morality and history. But even in these cases, plenary inspiration seems to have been absolutely necessary. "With regard to moral subjects, it may be observed, that although the remains of the law of nature furnish man with certain moral sentiments, yet, in his fallen state, his views of right and wrong arc so dark and confused, that there is not, perhaps, any case in whicli plenary inspiration was more necessary than this, in order that man might be furnished with a perfect rule of duty. With respect to history, where the facts recorded may be supposed to have been known by the sacred writers from their own

12 CONFESSION OF FAITH. [^CHAP. I.

observation, or from other aiithentic sources, it may be observed, in general, that sacred histoiy diffei-s, in the main ends proposed by it, from profane history." While profane liistory has for its object only the civil and political benefit of individuals and nations, the inspired historians propose a much higher aim, — the advancement of salvation in subserAdency to the glory of God in Christ, — an aim which requires a manner of thinking and writing peculiar to itself. " Neither does the variety of style found throughout the Scriptures form, in our apprehension, any valid objection to the doctrine of plenary inspiration. Though the inspired penmen were under infallible direction, both in regard to the sentiments to be communicated by them, and the phraseology best adapted to express these sentiments ; yet tlie Holy Spirit, for wise reasons, seems to have accommodated his suggestions, so far as relates to mere style, to the age in which they ■v\a'ote, and their respective talents for composition. 5. We observe further, in support of plenary inspiration, that unless it be admitted the Bible has no valid claim to be called the W^ord of God. The Scriptures frequently lay claim to a diAdne ongin in support of theu^ supreme authority as a rule of faith and manners ; but if the sacred wTiters were only under what is called superintendence, we cannot see the justness of that claim. It would be a gross perversion of words, to call a man the author of a book, who had no hand in its composition further than merely guarding its real author from falling into gross error. The designation, the Word of God, must suggest to every unprejudiced mind, that the Bible is from God, both in respect of sentiment and expression. Nor does it render the matter any better to tell us, that though some parts of the Bible were written under the mere superintendence of the Spirit, yet others were written by the inspiration of suggestion ; for this throws a suspicion over the whole, since it is impossible for us to determine what parts wei-e dictated by plenary inspiration, and what parts were not. The safe way is to hold by the doctrine of the Bible itself, that inspiration is one in kind ; that it is not a partial, but a full or plenary inspiration ; and that this applies to the whole of the sacred volume. * All Scripture is given by inspiration of God.' " *