<PAGE
37>
STUDY
III
THE
BIBLE AS A DIVINE REVELATION
VIEWED IN THE LIGHT OF REASON
The
Claims of the Bible and its Surface Evidence of Credibility--Its
Antiquity and Preservation--Its Moral Influence--Motives of
the Writers--General Character of the Writings--The Books of
Moses-- The Law of Moses--Peculiarities of the Government Instituted
by Moses--It was not a System of Priestcraft--Instructions to
Civil Rulers--Rich and Poor on a Common Level Before the Law--Safeguards
Against Tampering With the Rights of the People--The Priesthood
Not a Favored Class, How Supported, etc.--Oppression of Foreigners,
Widows, Orphans and Servants Guarded Against--The Prophets of
the Bible--Is There a Common Bond of Union Between the Law,
the Prophets and the New Testament Writers?--Miracles Not Unreasonable--The
Reasonable Conclusion.
THE
Bible is the torch of civilization and liberty. Its influence
for good in society has been recognized by the greatest statesmen,
even though they for the most part have looked at it through
the various glasses of conflicting creeds, which, while upholding
the Bible, grievously misrepresent its teachings. The grand
old book is unintentionally but woefully misrepresented by its
friends, many of whom would lay down life on its behalf; and
yet they do it more vital injury than its foes, by claiming
its support to their long-revered misconceptions of its truth,
received through the traditions of their fathers. Would that
such would awake, re-examine their oracle, and put to confusion
its enemies by disarming them of their weapons!
Since
the light of nature leads us to expect a fuller revelation of
God than that which nature supplies, the reasonable, thinking
mind will be prepared to examine the claims of anything purporting
to be a divine revelation, which <PAGE
38> bears a reasonable surface evidence of the
truthfulness of such claims. The Bible claims to be such a revelation
from God, and it does come to us with sufficient surface evidence
as to the probable correctness of its claims, and gives us a
reasonable hope that closer investigation will disclose more
complete and positive evidence that it is indeed the Word of
God.
The
Bible is the oldest book in existence; it has outlived the storms
of thirty centuries. Men have endeavored by every means possible
to banish it from the face of the earth: they have hidden it,
burned it, made it a crime punishable with death to have it
in possession, and the most bitter and relentless persecutions
have been waged against those who had faith in it; but still
the book lives. Today, while many of its foes slumber in death,
and hundreds of volumes written to discredit it and to overthrow
its influence, are long since forgotten, the Bible has found
its way into every nation and language of earth, over two hundred
different translations of it having been made. The fact that
this book has survived so many centuries, notwithstanding such
unparalleled efforts to banish and destroy it, is at least strong
circumstantial evidence that the great Being whom it claims
as its Author has also been its Preserver.
It
is also true that the moral influence of the Bible is uniformly
good. Those who become careful students of its pages are invariably
elevated to a purer life. Other writings upon religion and the
various sciences have done good and have ennobled and blessed
mankind, to some extent; but all other books combined have failed
to bring the joy, peace and blessing to the groaning creation
that the Bible has brought to both the rich and the poor, to
the learned and the unlearned. The Bible is not a book to be
read merely: it is a book to be studied with care and thought;
for God's thoughts are higher than our thoughts, and his ways
than <PAGE 39> our
ways. And if we would comprehend the plan and thoughts of the
infinite God, we must bend all our energies to that important
work. The richest treasures of truth do not always lie on the
surface.
This
book throughout constantly points and refers to one prominent
character, Jesus of Nazareth, who, it claims, was the Son of
God. From beginning to end his name, and office, and work, are
made prominent. That a man called Jesus of Nazareth lived, and
was somewhat noted, about the time indicated by the writers
of the Bible, is a fact of history outside the Bible, and it
is variously and fully corroborated. That this Jesus was crucified
because he had rendered himself offensive to the Jews and their
priesthood is a further fact established by history outside
the evidence furnished by the New Testament writers. The writers
of the New Testament (except Paul and Luke) were the personal
acquaintances and disciples of Jesus of Nazareth, whose doctrines
their writings set forth.
The
existence of any book implies motive on the part of the writer.
We therefore inquire, What motives could have inspired these
men to espouse the cause of this person? He was condemned to
death and crucified as a malefactor by the Jews, the most religious
among them assenting to and demanding his death, as one unfit
to live. And in espousing his cause, and promulgating his doctrines,
these men braved contempt, deprivation and bitter persecution,
risked life itself, and in some cases even suffered martyrdom.
Admitting that while he lived Jesus was a remarkable person,
in both his life and his teaching, what motive could there have
been for any to espouse his cause after he was dead?--especially
when his death was so ignominious? And if we suppose that these
writers invented their narratives, and that Jesus was their
imaginary or ideal hero, how absurd it would be to suppose that
sane men, after claiming <PAGE
40> that he was the Son of God, that he had
been begotten in a supernatural way, had supernatural powers
by which he had healed lepers, restored sight to those born
blind, caused the deaf to hear, and even raised the dead--how
very absurd to suppose that they would wind up the story of
such a character by stating that a little band of his enemies
executed him as a felon, while all his friends and disciples,
and among them the writers themselves, forsook him and fled
in the trying moment?
The
fact that profane history does not agree in some respects with
these writers should not lead us to regard their records as
untrue. Those who do thus conclude should assign and prove some
motive on the part of these writers for making false statements.
What motives could have prompted them? Could they reasonably
have hoped thereby for fortune, or fame, or power, or any earthly
advantage? The poverty of Jesus' friends, and the unpopularity
of their hero himself with the great religionists of Judea,
contradict such a thought; while the facts that he died as a
malefactor, a disturber of the peace, and that he was made of
no reputation, held forth no hope of enviable fame or earthly
advantage to those who should attempt to re-establish his doctrine.
On the contrary, if such had been the object of those who preached
Jesus, would they not speedily have given it up when they found
that it brought disgrace, persecution, imprisonment, stripes
and even death? Reason plainly teaches that men who sacrificed
home, reputation, honor and life; who lived not for present
gratification; but whose central aim was to elevate their fellowmen,
and who inculcated morals of the highest type, were not only
possessed of a motive, but further that their motive must have
been pure and their object grandly sublime. Reason further declares
that the testimony of such men, actuated only by pure and good
motives, is worthy of <PAGE
41> ten times the weight and consideration of
ordinary writers. Nor were these men fanatics: they were men
of sound and reasonable mind, and furnished in every case a
reason for their faith and hope; and they were perseveringly
faithful to those reasonable convictions.
And
what we have here noticed is likewise applicable to the various
writers of the Old Testament. They were, in the main, men notable
for their fidelity to the Lord; and this history as impartially
records and reproves their weaknesses and shortcomings as it
commends their virtues and faithfulness. This must astonish
those who presume the Bible to be a manufactured history, designed
to awe men into reverence of a religious system. There is a
straightforwardness about the Bible that stamps it as truth.
Knaves, desirous of representing a man as great, and especially
if desirous of presenting some of his writings as inspired of
God, would undoubtedly paint such a one's character blameless
and noble to the last degree. The fact that such a course has
not been pursued in the Bible is reasonable evidence
that it was not fraudulently gotten up to deceive.
Having,
then, reason to expect a revelation of God's will and
plan, and having found that the Bible, which claims to be that
revelation, was written by men whose motives we see no reason
to impugn, but which, on the contrary, we see reason to approve,
let us examine the character of the writings claimed as inspired,
to see whether their teachings correspond with the character
we have reasonably imputed to God, and whether they bear
internal evidence of their truthfulness.
The
first five books of the New Testament and several of the Old
Testament are narratives or histories of facts known to the
writers and vouched for by their characters. It is manifest
to all that it did not require a special revelation simply to
tell the truth with reference to matters with which <PAGE
42> they were intimately and fully acquainted.
Yet, since God desired to make a revelation to men, the fact
that these histories of passing events have a bearing on that
revelation would be a sufficient ground to make the inference
a reasonable one, that God would supervise, and so arrange,
that the honest writer whom he selected for the work should
be brought in contact with the needful facts. The credibility
of these historic portions of the Bible rests almost entirely
upon the characters and motives of their writers. Good men will
not utter falsehoods. A pure fountain will not give forth bitter
waters. And the united testimony of these writings silences
any suspicion that their authors would say or do evil, that
good might follow.
It
in no way invalidates the truthfulness of certain books of the
Bible, such as Kings, Chronicles, Judges, etc., when we say
that they are simply truthful and carefully kept histories of
prominent events and persons of their times. When it is remembered
that the Hebrew Scriptures contain history, as well as the law
and the prophecies, and that their histories, genealogies, etc.,
were the more explicit in detailing circumstances because of
the expectancy that the promised Messiah would come in a particular
line from Abraham, we see a reason for the recording of certain
facts of history considered indelicate in the light of this
twentieth century. For instance, a
clear record of the origin of the nations of the Moabites and
of the Ammonites, and of their relationship to Abraham and the
Israelites, was probably the necessity in the historian's mind
for a full history of their nativity. (Gen. 19:36-38) Likewise,
a very detailed account of Judah's children is given, of whom
came David, the king, through whom the genealogy of Mary, Jesus'
mother, as well as that of Joseph, her husband (Luke 3:23,31,33,34;
Matt. 1:2-16), is traced back to Abraham. Doubtless
the necessity of thoroughly establishing the pedigree <PAGE
43> was the more important, since of this tribe
(Gen. 49:10) was to come the ruling King of Israel, as well
as the promised Messiah, and hence the minutiae of detail not
given in other instances. Gen. 38
There
may be similar or different reasons for other historic facts
recorded in the Bible, of which by and by we may see the utility,
which, were it not a history, but simply a treatise on morals,
might without detriment be omitted; though no one can reasonably
say that the Bible anywhere countenances impurity. It is well,
furthermore, to remember that the same facts may be more or
less delicately stated in any language; and that while the translators
of the Bible were, rightly, too conscientious to omit any of
the record, yet they lived in a day less particular in the choice
of refined expressions than ours; and the same may be surmised
of the early Bible times and habits of expression. Certainly
the most fastidious can find no objection on this score to any
expression of the New Testament.
The
Books of Moses and the
Laws Therein Promulgated
The
first five books of the Bible are known as the Five Books of
Moses, though they nowhere mention his name as their author.
That they were written by Moses, or under his supervision, is
a reasonable inference; the account of his death and burial
being properly added by his secretary. The omission of the positive
statement that these books were written by Moses is no proof
against the thought; for had another written them to deceive
and commit a fraud, he would surely have claimed that they were
written by the great leader and statesman of Israel, in order
to make good his imposition. (See Deut. 31:9-27.) Of one thing
we are certain, Moses did lead out of Egypt the Hebrew nation.
He did organize them as a nation under the laws set forth in
<PAGE 44> these
books; and the Hebrew nation, by common consent, for over three
thousand years, has claimed these books as a gift to them from
Moses, and has held them so sacred that a jot or tittle must
not be altered--thus giving assurance of the purity of the text.
These
writings of Moses contain the only credible history extant,
of the epoch which it traverses. Chinese history affects to
begin at creation, telling how God went out on the water in
a skiff, and, taking in his hand a lump of earth, cast it into
the water. That lump of earth, it claims, became this world,
etc. But the entire story is so devoid of reason that the merest
child of intelligence would not be deceived by it. On the contrary,
the account given in Genesis starts with the reasonable assumption
that a God, a Creator, an intelligent First Cause, already existed.
It treats not of God's having a beginning, but of his work and
of its beginning and its systematic orderly progress--"In
the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Then
stepping over the origin of the earth without detail or explanation,
the narrative of the six days [epochs] of preparing it for man
proceeds. That account is substantially corroborated by the
accumulating light of science for four thousand years; hence
it is far more reasonable to accept the claim that its author,
Moses, was divinely inspired, than to assume that the intelligence
of one man was superior to the combined intelligence and research
of the rest of the race in three thousand years since, aided
by modern implements and millions of money.
Look
next at the system of laws laid down in these writings. They
certainly were without an equal, either in their day or since,
until this twentieth century; and the laws of this century are
based upon the principles laid down in the Mosaic Law, and framed
in the main by men who acknowledged the Mosaic Law as of divine
origin.
<PAGE
45>
The
Decalogue is a brief synopsis of the whole law. Those Ten Commandments
enjoin a code of worship and morals that must strike every student
as remarkable; and if never before known, and now found among
the ruins and relics of Greece, or Rome, or Babylon (nations
which have risen and fallen again, long since those laws were
given), they would be regarded as marvelous if not supernatural.
But familiarity with them and their claims has begotten measurable
indifference, so that their real greatness is unnoticed except
by the few. True, those commandments do not teach of Christ;
but they were given, not to Christians, but to Hebrews; not
to teach faith in a ransom, but to convince men of their sinful
state, and need of a ransom. And the substance of those commandments
was grandly epitomized by the illustrious founder of Christianity,
in the words: "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all
thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind, and
with all thy strength" and "Thou shalt love thy neighbor
as thyself." Mark 12:30,31
The
government instituted by Moses differed from all others, ancient
and modern, in that it claimed to be that of the Creator himself,
and the people were held accountable to him; their laws and
institutions, civil and religious, claimed to emanate from God,
and, as we shall presently see, were in perfect harmony with
what reason teaches us to be God's character. The Tabernacle,
in the center of the camp, had in its "Most Holy"
apartment a manifestation of Jehovah's presence as their King,
whence by supernatural means they received instruction for the
proper administration of their affairs as a nation. An order
of priests was established, which had complete charge of the
Tabernacle, and through them alone access and communion with
Jehovah was permitted. The first thought of some in this connection
would perhaps be: "Ah! there we have the object of <PAGE
46> their organization: with them, as with other
nations, the priests ruled the people, imposing upon their credulity
and exciting their fears for their own honor and profit."
But hold, friend; let us not too hastily assume anything. Where
there is such good opportunity for testing this matter by the
facts, it would not be reasonable to jump to conclusions without
the facts. The unanswerable evidences are contrary to such suppositions.
The rights and the privileges of the priests were limited; they
were given no civil power whatever, and wholly lacked opportunity
for using their office to impose upon the rights or consciences
of the people; and this arrangement was made by Moses, a member
of the priestly line.
As
God's representative in bringing Israel out of Egyptian bondage,
the force of circumstances had centralized the government in
his hand, and made the meek Moses an autocrat in power and authority,
though from the meekness of his disposition he was in fact the
overworked servant of the people, whose very life was being
exhausted by the onerous cares of his position. At this juncture
a civil government was established, which was virtually a democracy.
Let us not be misunderstood: Regarded as unbelievers would esteem
it, Israel's government was a democracy, but regarded in the
light of its own claims, it was a theocracy, i.e., a divine
government; for the laws given by God, through Moses, permitted
of no amendments: they must neither add to nor take from their
code of laws. Thus seen, Israel's
government was different from any other civil government, either
before or since. "The Lord said unto Moses, Gather unto
me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to
be elders of the people and officers over them; and bring them
unto the Tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand
there with thee. And I will come down and talk with thee there,
and I will take of the <PAGE
47> spirit which is upon thee and will put it
upon them, and they shall bear the burden of the people with
thee, that thou bear it not alone." (Num. 11:16,17. See
also verses Num 11:24-30 for an example of true and guileless
statesmanship and meekness.) Moses, rehearsing this matter,
says: "So I took the chief of your tribes, wise men, and
known [of influence], and made them heads over you: captains
over thousands, and captains over hundreds, and captains over
fifties, and captains over tens, and officers among your tribes."
Deut. 1:15; Exod. 18:13-26
Thus
it appears that this distinguished lawgiver, so far from seeking
to perpetuate or increase his own power by placing the government
of the people under the control of his direct relatives, of
the priestly tribe, to use their religious authority to fetter
the rights and liberties of the people, on the contrary introduced
to the people a form of government calculated to cultivate the
spirit of liberty. The histories of other nations and rulers
show no parallel to this. In every case the ruler has sought
his own aggrandizement and greater power. Even in instances
where such have aided in establishing republics, it has appeared
from subsequent events that they did it through policy, to obtain
favor with the people, and to perpetuate their own power. Circumstanced
as Moses was, any ambitious man, governed by policy and attempting
to perpetuate a fraud upon the people, would have worked for
greater centralization of power in himself and his family; especially
as this would have seemed an easy task from the religious authority
being already in that tribe, and from the claim of this nation
to be governed by God, from the Tabernacle. Nor is it supposable
that a man capable of forming such laws, and of ruling such
a people, would be so dull of comprehension as not to see what
the tendency of his course would be. So
completely was the government of the people put into their own
hands, <PAGE 48> that
though it was stipulated that the weightier cases which those
governors could not decide were to be brought unto Moses, yet
they themselves were the judges as to what cases went before
Moses: "The cause which is too hard for you, bring it unto
me, and I will hear it." Deut. 1:17
Thus
seen, Israel was a republic whose officers acted under a divine
commission. And to the confusion of those who ignorantly claim
that the Bible sanctions an established empire rule over the
people, instead of "a government of the people by the people,"
be it noted that this republican form of civil government continued
for over four hundred years. And it was then changed for that
of a kingdom at the request of "The Elders," without
the Lord's approval, who said to Samuel, then acting as a sort
of informal president, "Hearken unto the voice of the people
in all that they shall say unto thee, for they have not rejected
thee, but they have rejected Me, that I should not reign over
them." At God's instance Samuel
explained to the people how their rights and liberties would
be disregarded, and how they would become servants by such a
change; yet they had become infatuated with the popular idea,
illustrated all around them in other nations. (1 Sam. 8:6-22)
In considering this account of their desire for a king,
who is not impressed with the thought that Moses could have
firmly established himself at the head of a great empire without
difficulty?
While
Israel as a whole constituted one nation, yet the tribal division
was ever recognized after Jacob's death. Each family, or tribe,
by common consent, elected or recognized certain members as
its representatives, or chiefs. This custom was continued even
through their long slavery in Egypt. These were called chiefs
or elders, and it was to these that Moses delivered the honor
and power of civil government; whereas, had he desired to centralize
power in himself <PAGE
49> and his own family, these would have been
the last men to honor with power and office.
The
instructions given those appointed to civil rulership as from
God are a model of simplicity and purity. Moses declares to
the people, in the hearing of these judges: "I charged
your judges at that time, saying, Hear the causes between your
brethren, and judge righteously between every man and his brother,
and the stranger [foreigner] that is with him. Ye shall not
respect persons in judgment; but ye shall hear the small as
well as the great; ye shall not be afraid of the face of man,
for the judgment is God's; and the cause that is too hard for
you, bring it unto me, and I will hear it." (Deut. 1:16,17)
Such hard cases were, after Moses' death, brought directly to
the Lord through the High Priest, the answer being Yes or No,
by the Urim and Thummim.
In
view of these facts, what shall we say of the theory
which suggests that these books were written by knavish priests
to secure to themselves influence and power over the people?
Would such men for such a purpose forge records destructive
to the very aims they sought to advance-- records which prove
conclusively that the great Chief of Israel, and one of their
own tribe, at the instance of God, cut off the priesthood from
civil power by placing that power in the hands of the people?
Does any one consider such a conclusion reasonable?
Again,
it is worthy of note that the laws of the most advanced civilization,
in this twentieth century, do not more carefully provide that
rich and poor shall stand on a common level in accountability
before the civil law. Absolutely no distinction was made by
Moses' laws. And as for the protection of the people from the
dangers incident to some becoming very poor and others excessively
wealthy and powerful, <PAGE
50> no other national law has ever been enacted
which so carefully guarded this point. Moses' law provided for
a restitution every fiftieth year--their Jubilee year. This law, by preventing the absolute alienation of property,
thereby prevented its accumulation in the hands of a few. (Lev.25:9,13-23,27-30)
In fact,
they were taught to consider themselves
brethren, and to act accordingly; to assist each other without
compensation, and to take no usury of one another. See Exod.
22:25; Lev. 25:36,37; Num. 26:52-56.
All
the laws were made public, thus preventing designing men from
successfully tampering with the rights of the people. The laws
were exposed in such a manner that any who chose might copy
them; and, in order that the poorest and most unlearned might
not be ignorant of them, it was made the duty of the priests
to read them to the people at their septennial festivals. (Deut.
31:10-13) Is it reasonable to suppose that such laws and arrangements
were designed by bad men, or by men scheming to defraud the
people of their liberties and happiness? Such an assumption
would be unreasonable.
In
its regard for the rights and interests of foreigners, and of
enemies, the Mosaic law was thirty-two centuries ahead of its
times--if indeed the laws of the most civilized of today equal
it in fairness and benevolence. We read:
"Ye
shall have one manner of law as well
for the stranger [foreigner] as for one of your own country;
for I am the Lord your God." Exod. 12:49; Lev. 24:22
"And
if a stranger sojourn with thee in your land, ye shall not vex
him; but the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you
as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for
ye were strangers in the land of Egypt." Lev. 19:33,34
"If
thou meet thine enemy's ox or his ass going astray, thou
<PAGE 51> shalt
surely bring it back to him again. If thou see the ass of him
that hateth thee lying under his burden, wouldst thou
cease to leave thy business and help him? Thou shalt surely
leave it, to join with [assist] him." Exod. 23:4,5, margin
Even
the dumb animals
were not forgotten. Cruelty to these as well as to human beings
was prohibited strictly. An ox must not be muzzled while threshing
the grain; for the good reason that any laborer is worthy of
his food. Even the ox and the ass must not plow together, because
so unequal in strength and tread: it would be cruelty. Their
rest was also provided for. Deut. 25:4; 22:10; Exod. 23:12
The
priesthood may be claimed by some to have been a selfish institution,
because the tribe of Levites was supported by the annual tenth,
or tithe, of the individual produce of their brethren of the
other tribes. This fact, stated thus, is an unfair presentation
too common to skeptics, who, possibly ignorantly, thereby misrepresent
one of the most remarkable evidences of God's part in the organization
of that system, and that it was not the work of a selfish and
scheming priesthood. Indeed, it is not infrequently misrepresented
by a modern priesthood, which urges a similar system now, using
that as a precedent, without mentioning the condition of things
upon which it was founded, or its method of payment.
It
was, in fact, founded upon the strictest equity. When Israel
came into possession of the land of Canaan, the Levites certainly
had as much right to a share of the land as the other tribes;
yet, by God's express command, they got none of it, except certain
cities or villages for residence, scattered among the various
tribes, whom they were to serve in religious things. Nine times
is this prohibition given, before the division of the land.
Instead of the land, some equivalent should surely be provided
them, and the tithe was <PAGE
52> therefore this reasonable and just provision.
Nor is this all: the tithe, though, as we have seen, a just
debt, was not enforced as a tax, but was to be paid as a voluntary
contribution. And no threat bound them to make those contributions:
all depended upon their conscientiousness. The only exhortations
to the people on the subject are as follows:
"Take
heed to thyself that thou forsake not
the Levite as long as thou livest upon the earth." (Deut.
12:19) "And the Levite that is within thy gates, thou shalt
not forsake him; for he hath no part nor inheritance with thee"
[in the land]. Deut. 14:27
Is
it, we ask, reasonable to suppose that this order of things
would have been thus arranged by selfish and ambitious priests?--an
arrangement to disinherit themselves and to make them dependent
for support upon their brethren? Does not reason teach us to
the contrary?
In
harmony with this, and equally inexplicable
on any other grounds than those claimed--that God is the author
of those laws--is the fact that no special provision was made
for honoring the priesthood. In nothing would imposters be more
careful than to provide reverence and respect for themselves,
and severest penalties and curses upon those who misused them.
But nothing of the kind appears: no special honor, or reverence,
or immunity from violence or insult, is provided. The common
law, which made no distinction between classes, and was no respecter
of persons, was their only protection. This is the more remarkable
because the treatment of servants, and strangers, and the aged,
was the subject of special legislation. For instance: Thou
shalt not vex nor oppress a stranger, or widow, or fatherless
child; for if they cry at all unto me [to God] I will
surely hear their cry; and my wrath shall wax hot, and I will
kill you with the sword, and your wives shall be widows and
<PAGE 53> your
children fatherless. (Exod. 22:21-24; 23:9; Lev. 19:33,34) "Thou
shalt not oppress an hired servant that is poor and needy,
whether he be of thy brethren, or of strangers that are in thy
land, within thy gates. At his day
thou shalt give him his hire, neither
shall the sun go down upon it, for he is poor, and setteth his
heart upon it; lest he cry against thee unto the Lord and it
be sin unto thee." (Lev. 19:13 ; Deut. 24:14,15; Exod.
21:26,27) "Thou shalt rise up before the hoary head and
honor the face of the old man." (Lev. 19:32. See also Lev.
19:14.) All this, yet nothing special for Priests, or Levites,
or their tithes.
The
sanitary arrangements of the law, so needful to a poor and long-oppressed
people, together with the arrangements and limitations respecting
clean and unclean animals which might or might not be eaten,
are remarkable, and would, with other features, be of interest
if space permitted their examination, as showing that law to
have been abreast with, if not in advance of, the latest conclusions
of medical science on the subject. The law of Moses had also
a typical character, which we must leave for future consideration;
but even our hasty glance has furnished overwhelming evidence
that this law, which constitutes the very framework of the entire
system of revealed religion, which the remainder of the Bible
elaborates, is truly a marvelous display of wisdom and justice,
especially when its date is taken into consideration.
In
the light
of reason, all must admit that it bears
no evidence of being the work of wicked, designing men, but
that it corresponds exactly with what nature teaches to be the
character of God. It gives evidence of his Wisdom, Justice and
Love. And further, the evidently pious and noble lawgiver, Moses,
denies that the laws were his own, and attributes them to God.
(Exod. 24:12; Deut. 9:9-11 ; Exod. 26:30; <PAGE
54> Lev. 1:1) In view of his general character,
and his commands to the people not to bear false witness, and
to avoid hypocrisy and lying, is it reasonable to suppose that
such a man bore false witness and palmed off his own views and
laws for those of God? It should be remembered also that we
are examining the present copies of the Bible, and that therefore
the integrity for which it is so marked applies equally to the
successors of Moses; for though bad men were among those successors,
who did seek their own and not the people's good, it is evident
that they did not tamper with the Sacred Writings, which are
pure to this day.
The
Prophets of the Bible
Glance
now at the general character of the
prophets of the Bible and their testimonies. A rather remarkable
fact is that the prophets, with few exceptions, were not of
the priestly class; and that in their day their prophecies were
generally repugnant to the degenerating and time-serving priesthood,
as well as to the idolatrously inclined people. The burden of
their messages from God to the people was generally reproof
for sin, coupled with warnings of coming punishments, intertwined
with which we find occasional promises of future blessings,
after they should be cleansed from sin and should return to
favor with the Lord. Their experiences, for the most part, were far from enviable:
they were generally reviled, many of them being imprisoned and
put to violent deaths. See 1 Kings 18:4,10,17,18; 19:10; Jer.
38:6; Heb. 11:32-38. In some instances it was years after their
death before their true character as God's prophets was recognized.
But we speak thus of the prophetic writers whose utterances
claim to be the direct inspiration of Jehovah. It
is well in this connection that we should remember that in
the giving of the law to Israel there was no priestly intervention:
it was given by God to the people by the hand <PAGE
55> of Moses. (Exod. 19:17-25; Deut. 5:1-5)
And, furthermore, it was made the duty
of every man seeing a violation of the law to reprove the sinner.
(Lev. 19:17) Thus all had the authority to teach and reprove;
but since, as in our own day, the majority were absorbed in
the cares of business, and became indifferent and irreligious,
the few comparatively fulfilled this requirement by reproving
sin and exhorting to godliness; and these preachers are termed
"prophets" in both the Old and New Testaments. The
term prophet, as generally used, signifies
public expounder, and the public teachers of idolatry
were also so called; for instance, "the prophets of Baal,"
etc. See 1 Cor. 14:1-6; 2 Pet. 2:1; Matt. 7:15; 14:5; Neh. 6:7;
1 Kings 18:40; Titus 1:12.
Prophesying,
in the ordinary sense of teaching, afterward became popular
with a certain class, and degenerated into Phariseeism--teaching,
instead of God's commandments, the traditions of the ancients,
thereby opposing the truth and becoming false prophets, or false
teachers. Matt. 15:2-9
Out
of the large class called prophets, Jehovah at various times
made choice of some whom he specially commissioned to deliver
messages, relating sometimes to things then at hand, at other
times to future events. It is to the writings of this class,
who spoke and wrote as they were moved by the holy Spirit, that
we are now giving attention. They might with propriety be designated
Divinely
Commissioned Prophets or Seers.
When
it is remembered that these prophets were mainly laymen, drawing
no support from the tithes of the priestly tribe, and when,
added to this, is the fact that they were frequently not only
the reprovers of kings and judges, but also of priests (though
they reproved not the office, but the personal sins of the men
who filled it), it becomes evident that we could not reasonably
decide that these prophets <PAGE
56> were parties to any league of priests, or
others, to fabricate falsehood in the name of God. Reason in
the light of facts contradicts such a suspicion.
If,
then, we find no reason to impeach the motives of the various
writers of the Bible, but find that the spirit of its various
parts is righteousness and truth, let us next proceed to inquire
whether there exists any link, or bond of union, between the
records of Moses, those of the other prophets, and those of
the New Testament writers. If we shall find one common line
of thought interwoven throughout the Law and the Prophets and
the New Testament writings, which cover a period of fifteen
hundred years, this, taken in connection with the character
of the writers, will be a good reason for admitting their claim--that
they are divinely inspired --particularly if the theme common
to all of them is a grand and noble one, comporting well with
what sanctified common sense teaches regarding the character
and attributes of God.
This
we do find: One plan, spirit, aim and purpose pervades the entire
book. Its opening pages record the creation and fall of man;
its closing pages tell of man's recovery from that fall; and
its intervening pages show the successive steps of the plan
of God for the accomplishment of this purpose. The harmony,
yet contrast, of the first three and the last three chapters
of the Bible is striking. The one describes the first creation,
the other the renewed or restored creation, with sin and its
penal-curse removed; the one shows Satan and evil entering the
world to deceive and destroy, the other shows his work undone,
the destroyed ones restored, evil extinguished and Satan destroyed;
the one shows the dominion lost by Adam, the other shows it
restored and forever established by Christ, and God's will done
in earth as in heaven; the one shows sin the producing cause
of degradation, <PAGE
57> shame and death, the other shows the reward
of righteousness to be glory, honor and life.
Though
written by many pens, at various times, under different circumstances,
the Bible is not merely a collection of moral precepts, wise
maxims and words of comfort. It is more: it is a reasonable,
philosophical and harmonious statement of the causes of present
evil in the world, its only remedy and the final results as
seen by divine wisdom, which saw the end of the plan from before
its beginning, marking as well the pathway of God's people,
and upholding and strengthening them with exceeding great and
precious promises to be realized in due time.
The
teaching of Genesis, that man was tried in a state of original
perfection in one representative, that he failed, and that the
present imperfection, sickness and death are the results, but
that God has not forsaken him, and will ultimately recover him
through a redeemer, born of a woman (Gen. 3:15), is kept up
and elaborated all the way through. The necessity of the death
of a redeemer as a sacrifice for sins, and of his righteousness
as a covering for our sin, is pointed out in the clothing of
skins for Adam and Eve; in the acceptance of Abel's offerings;
in Isaac on the altar; in the death of the various sacrifices
by which the patriarchs had access to God, and of those instituted
under the law and perpetuated throughout the Jewish age. The
prophets, though credited with understanding but slightly the
significance of some of their utterances (1 Pet. 1:12), mention
the laying of the sins upon a person instead of a dumb animal,
and in prophetic vision they see him who is to redeem and to
deliver the race led "as a lamb to the slaughter,"
that "the chastisement of our peace was upon him,"
and that "by his stripes we are healed." They pictured
him as "despised and rejected of men, a man of sorrows
and acquainted <PAGE
58> with grief," and declared that "The
Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all." (Isa. 53:3-6)
They told where this deliverer would
be born (Micah 5:2), and when he should
die, assuring us that it would be "not for himself."
(Dan. 9:26) They mention various
peculiarities concerning him--that he would be "righteous,"
and free from "deceit," "violence," or any
just cause of death (Isa. 53:8,9,11); that
he would be betrayed for thirty pieces of silver (Zech. 11:12);
that he would be numbered among transgressors
in his death (Isa. 53:12); that not a
bone of him should be broken (Psa. 34:20; John 19:36); and that
though he should die and be buried, his flesh would not corrupt,
neither would he remain in the grave. Psa. 16:10; Acts 2:31
The
New Testament writers clearly and forcibly, yet simply, record
the fulfilment of all these predictions in Jesus of Nazareth,
and by logical reasonings show that such a ransom price
as he gave was needful, as already predicted in the Law and
the Prophets, before the sins of the world could be blotted out. (Isa.
1:18) They trace the entire plan in a most logical and forcible
manner, appealing neither to the prejudices nor to the passions
of their hearers, but to their enlightened reason alone, furnishing
some of the most remarkably close and cogent reasoning to be
found anywhere on any subject. See Rom. 5:17-19, and onward
to the 12th chapter.
Moses,
in the Law, pointed not alone to a sacrifice, but also to a
blotting out of sins and a blessing of the people under this
great deliverer, whose power and authority he declares shall
vastly exceed his own, though it should be "like unto"
it. (Deut. 18:15,19) The promised
deliverer is to
bless not only Israel, but through Israel "all the families
of the earth." (Gen. 12:3; 18:18; 22:18; 26:4) And
notwithstanding the prejudices of the Jewish people to the contrary,
<PAGE 59> the
prophets continue the same strain, declaring that Messiah shall
be also "for a light to lighten the Gentiles" (Isa.
49:6; Luke 2:32); that the Gentiles should
come to him "from the ends of the earth" (Jer. 16:19);
that his name "shall be great among
the Gentiles" (Mal. 1:11); and that "the
glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see
it together." Isa. 40:5. See also
Isa. 42:1-7.
The
New Testament writers claim a divine anointing which enabled
them to realize the fulfilment of the prophecies concerning
the sacrifice of Christ. They, though prejudiced as Jews to
think of every blessing as limited to their own people (Acts
11:1-18), were enabled to see that while their nation would
be blessed, all the families of the earth should be blessed
also, with and through them. They saw also that, before the
blessing of either Israel or the world, a selection would be
made of a "little flock" from both Jews and Gentiles,
who, being tried, would be found worthy to be made joint-heirs
of the glory and honor of the Great Deliverer, and sharers with
him of the honor of blessing Israel and all the nations. Rom.
8:17
These
writers point out the harmony of this view with what is written
in the Law and the Prophets; and the grandeur and breadth of
the plan they present more than meets the most exalted conception
of what it purports to be-- "Good tidings of great joy,
which shall be unto all people."
The
thought of Messiah as a ruler of not only Israel, but also of
the world, suggested in the books of Moses, is the theme of
all the prophets. The thought of the kingdom was uppermost also
in the teaching of the apostles; and Jesus taught that we should
pray, "Thy Kingdom come," and promised those a share
in it who would first suffer for the truth, and thus prove themselves
worthy.
This
hope of the coming glorious kingdom gave all the faithful ones
courage to endure persecution and to suffer <PAGE
60> reproach, deprivation and loss, even unto
death. And in the grand allegorical prophecy which closes the
New Testament, the worthy "Lamb that was slain" (Rev.
5:12), the worthy "overcomers" whom he will make kings
and priests in his kingdom, and the trials and obstacles which
they must overcome to be worthy to share that kingdom, are all
faithfully portrayed. Then are introduced symbolic representations
of the blessings to accrue to the world under that Millennial
reign, when Satan shall be bound and Adamic death and sorrow
wiped out, and when all the nations of earth shall walk in the
light of the heavenly kingdom--the new Jerusalem.
The
Bible, from first to last, holds out a doctrine found nowhere
else, and in opposition to the theories of all the heathen religions--that
a future life for the dead will come through a RESURRECTION
OF THE DEAD. All the inspired writers expressed their confidence
in a redeemer, and one declares that "in the morning,"
when God shall call them from the tomb, and they shall come
forth, the wicked shall no longer hold the rulership of earth;
for "The upright shall have dominion
over them, in the morning." (Psa. 49:14) The resurrection
of the dead is taught by the prophets; and the writers of the
New Testament base all their hopes of future life and blessing
upon it. Paul expresses it thus: "If there be no resurrection
of the dead, then is Christ not risen; and if Christ be not
risen, then is our preaching vain and your faith is also vain;...then
they which are fallen asleep in Christ are perished.
But now is Christ risen from the dead, and become the firstfruits
of them that slept;...for as in Adam all die, even so in Christ
shall all be made alive." 1 Cor. 15:13-22
Like
a watch, whose many wheels might at first seem superfluous,
but whose slowest moving wheels are essential, so the Bible,
composed of many parts, and prepared by many <PAGE
61> pens, is one complete and harmonious whole.
Not a single part is superfluous, and though some parts take
a more active and prominent place than others, all are useful
and necessary. It is becoming popular among the so-called "advanced
thinkers" and "great theologians" of the present
day to treat lightly, or to ignore if they do not deny, many
of the "miracles" of the Old Testament, calling them
"old wives' fables." Of these are the accounts of
Jonah and the great fish, Noah and the ark, Eve and the serpent,
the standing still of the sun at the command of Joshua, and
Balaam's speaking ass. Seemingly these wise men overlook the
fact that the Bible is so interwoven and united in its various
parts that to tear from it these miracles, or to discredit them,
is to destroy or discredit the whole. For if the original accounts
are false, those who repeated them were either falsifiers or
dupes, and in either case it would be impossible for us to accept
their testimony as divinely inspired. To eliminate from the
Bible the miracles mentioned would invalidate the testimony
of its principal writers, besides that of our Lord Jesus. The
story of the fall is attested by Paul (Rom. 5:17); also Eve's
beguilement by the serpent (2 Cor. 11:3; 1 Tim. 2:14). See also
our Lord's reference to the latter in Rev. 12:9 and Rev. 20:2.
The standing of the sun at the overthrow of the Amorites, as
an evidence of the Lord's power, was evidently typical of the
power to be displayed in the future, in "the day of the
Lord," at the hand of him whom Joshua typified. This
is attested by
three prophets. (Isa. 28:21; Hab. 2:1-3,13,14 and Hab. 3:2-11;
Zech. 14:1,6,7) The account of the speaking
ass is confirmed by Jude (Jude 11), and by Peter (2 Pet. 2:16).
And the great teacher, Jesus, confirms the narratives of Jonah
and the great fish and of Noah and the flood. (Matt. 12:40;
24:38,39; Luke 17:26. See also 1 Pet. 3:20.) Really these are
no greater miracles than those performed by Jesus and the <PAGE
62> apostles, such as the turning of water into
wine, the healing of diseases, etc.; and as a miracle, the awakening
of the dead is most wonderful of all.
These
miracles, not common to our experience, find parallels about
us every day, which, being more common, are passed by unnoticed.
The reproduction of living organisms, either animal or vegetable,
is beyond our comprehension, as well as beyond our power--hence
miraculous. We can see the exercise of life principle, but can
neither understand nor produce it. We plant two seeds side by
side; the conditions, air, water, and soil, are alike; they
grow, we cannot tell how, nor can the wisest philosopher
explain this miracle. These seeds develop organisms of opposite
tendencies; one creeps, the other stands erect; form, flower,
coloring, everything differs, though the conditions were the
same. Such miracles grow common to us, and we cease to remember
them as such as we leave the wonderment of childhood; yet they
manifest a power as much beyond our own, and beyond our limited
intelligence, as the few miracles recorded in the Bible for
special purposes, and as intended illustrations of omnipotence,
and of the ability of the great Creator to overcome every obstacle
and to accomplish all his will, even to our promised resurrection
from the dead, the extermination of evil, and the ultimate reign
of everlasting righteousness.
Here
we rest the case. Every step has been tested by reason. We have
found that there is a God, a supreme, intelligent Creator, in
whom wisdom, justice, love and power exist in perfect harmony.
We have found it reasonable to expect a revelation of his plans
to his creatures capable of appreciating and having an interest
in them. We have found the Bible, claiming to be that revelation,
worthy of consideration. We have examined its writers, and their
possible objects, in the light of what they taught; we have
been <PAGE 63> astonished;
and our reason has told us that such wisdom, combined
with such purity of motive, was not the cunning device of crafty
men for selfish ends. Reason has urged that it is far more probable
that such righteous and benevolent sentiments and laws must
be of God and not of men, and has insisted that they could not
be the work of knavish priests. We have seen the harmony of
testimony concerning Jesus, his ransom-sacrifice, and the resurrection
and blessing of all as the outcome, in his glorious kingdom
to come; and reason has told us that a scheme so grand and comprehensive,
beyond all we could otherwise have reason to expect, yet built
upon such reasonable deductions, must be the plan of God for
which we seek. It cannot be the mere device of men, for even
when revealed, it is almost too grand to be believed by men.
When
Columbus discovered the Orinoco river, some one said he had
found an island. He replied: "No such river as that flows
from an island. That mighty torrent must drain the waters of
a continent." So the depth and power and wisdom and scope
of the Bible's testimony convince us that not man, but the Almighty
God, is the author of its plans and revelations. We have taken
but a hasty glance at the surface claims of the Scriptures to
be of divine origin, and have found them reasonable. Succeeding
chapters will unfold the various parts of the plan of God, and
will, we trust, give ample evidence to every candid mind that
the Bible is a divinely inspired revelation, and that the length
and breadth and height and depth of the plan it unfolds gloriously
reflect the divine character, hitherto but dimly comprehended,
but now more clearly seen in the light of the dawning Millennial
Day.
<PAGE
64>
Truth
Most Precious
Great
truths are dearly bought. The common truth,
Such as men give and take from day
to day,
Comes in the common walk of easy life,
Blown by the careless wind across
our way.
Great
truths are dearly won; not found by chance,
Nor wafted on the breath of summer
dream;
But grasped in the great struggle of the soul,
Hard buffeting with adverse wind and
stream.
Sometimes,
'mid conflict, turmoil, fear and grief,
When the strong hand of God, put forth
in might,
Ploughs up the subsoil of the stagnant heart,
It brings some buried truth-seeds
to the light.
Not in
the general mart, 'mid corn and wine;
Not in the merchandise of gold and
gems;
Not in the world's gay hall of midnight mirth,
Nor 'mid the blaze of regal diadems;
Not in
the general clash of human creeds,
Nor in the merchandise 'twixt church
and world,
Is truth's fair treasure found, 'mongst tares and weeds;
Nor her fair banner in their midst
unfurled.
Truth
springs like harvest from the well-ploughed fields,
Rewarding patient toil, and faith
and zeal.
To those thus seeking her, she ever yields
Her richest treasures for their lasting
wealth.