IX. Inspiration of the Scriptures.-No doubt many vague and indistinct ideas obtain with regard to the true import and extent of the inspiration of the Scriptures. The Bible is properly called the word of God, the revelation of heaven, the inspiration of God, &c. From this phraseology many have inferred that christians suppose the writers of the Bible to have been as passive in that writing as wooden machines that they were passively moved on by the Holy Ghost to the use of every word and the formation of every letter. That the writers used no human knowledge or agency, but took their pens in hand, and suffered them to be moved entirely by the invisible power of God.We believe no such thing; and we think enlightened christians generally do not. No such a revelation was necessary; but it was only necessary that the writers should have extraordinary powers where their ordinary qualifications were deficient or inadequate to the work assigned them. They had a competent knowledge of the language they used, therefore they needed fuo inspiration on this point. Hence we are not to suppose the phraseology or rhetorick, or style of the Bible any more inspired than other books.

Agreeably to this idea we discover as many different styles of composition as there were different writers. Each evidently used a style peculiar to himself.

2. They obtained much knowledge of facts by ordinary means, and it was unnecessary that they should be inspired with such knowledge as they possessed without extraordinary inspiration. Hence they relate many incidents both in the Old and New Testament, which they learned by the ordinary senses, which they had seen and heard; and not unfrequently, they speak of things, customs, and circumstances, which were known as matters of general and undisputed notoriety. Moses tells us that the waters of the red sea opened to let the Hebrews pass, but he knew this fact without any extraordinary inspiration. The Evange

lists tell us what they saw and heard, &c. And so we may say of all the writers, when they recorded facts which they knew by ordinary means, they depended not on extraordinary inspiration for their knowledge. The apostles were enabled to work miracles, when miracles were necessary to accomplish the divine purposes, but we should not conclude from thence that they walked about, eat, drank, &c. miraculously. From these remarks it will be perceived, that we conclude the writers used their own language and style in all cases; that they recorded facts, learned by the ordinary means, whenever such means of informa tion were adequate to the grand object of the revelation.

This accounts for the fact that different writers relate the same event with different phraseology, and particularity. This little variety, while it forbids the idea of concert or combination, demonstrates that the facts were so obvious, that the different writers saw and knew them in their own persons. So far from being any disparagement to the records, it proves clearly that each recorded such facts as most forcibly impressed his senses, or most powerfully attracted his notice, without any consultation or connivance with the others. What we have here said for the non-inspiration of the Scriptures, will account for all the diversity of style, all the variety of figures, all the ambiguity of expression, all the trifling and unimportant discrepancies in the relation of substantial facts, and all such phraseologies as offend the delicacy of a refined and improved taste. Now we will tell what we conceive to be the true inspiration of the Bible. 1. The writers were inspired with an unyielding integrity of heart, or a disposition to tell the truth only. 2. They were inspired with all the knowledge necessary to the revelation, which they could not acquire by ordinary means. For instance, those men, who saw Jesus Christ on earth; who saw his miracles performed, who saw him crucified, who saw him after his resurrection, and heard his instructions from his lips, would

need no other inspiration to make a faithful record of all these things, that should be substantially true, than merely a disposition to record the truth only. But when they are to record a moral or doctrinal principle or a prediction, not to be known by ordinary means, and not heard from Jesus himself, they must be inspired by the Holy Spirit with the knowledge of such truth. We may say then that the Scriptures were written by men in human language, who were inspired to write the truth, and so guided by the spirit of God as to make the book substantially true in all its doetrinal and moral features, all its splendid miracles, all its predictions, all its historical relations, and every thing that is essential to the substantial perfection of the whole.

Although we suppose much of the Scriptures to consist of well authenticated facts which the writers knew by ordinary and natural means, yet God miraculously made known to them, whatever was necessary to make the whole perfect in all essential matters of doctrine and fact. So clearly is their divine inspiration, so far as this, established, that were we to go to the evidence on both sides, examine every argument that has ever been adduced by its opponents, and every argument in its favour, we should find an irresistible and overwhelming balance to preponderate in its support. It is not necessary, as some philosophers have insinuated and their dupes have believed, for us to reject philosophy in order to be christians. No, we could never believe on such terms. True philosophy and sound reason will coalesce in every particular with every principle of the Bible and every particle of christianity. We may not see the reason of some things revealed; but is it not a fact that all human reason is imperfect? Were it not so, a revelation would not have been necessary. Whatever in revelation reason cannot clearly explain is not contrary to reason but above it. Christianity is reasonable, but it requires the reason of God to perceive the reason of the whole of it. However, the more perfect our reason becomes by

cultivation, the more of the reason of revelation we can perceive, and no human reason can confute it. Men have attempted to array philosophy against the Bible in every age, but every argument has been fairly met over and over again. So that on the whole they have been an advantage to the Bible, by provoking investigation, and causing to be brought forward thousands of important truths and facts, which will demonstrate the genuineness, authenticity, and authority of the Bible to the latest posterity; and which otherwise might have been lost in the revolutions of time.

cen

In the second century, Celsus, a learned philosopher, wrote against christianity, when all the scenes of it had but recently occurred, and the whole subject was perfectly accessible. So did Porphyry and Hierocles of the third ce tury, and Julian of the fourth, but so far from militating against christianity, their writings go directly to establish facts which prove its authenticity. Their arguments were confuted by the early christians. Late philosophers have made the same attempt but without any effect except upon those who read only their side of the question, and of course close their eyes upon facts of inconceivable moment.

A work designed to overthrow the Bible most in circuiation in our country, is Thomas Paine's Age of Reason. Although the author is deservedly popular as a political writer, he is certainly guilty of the most puny and contemptible work against the Bible, of any that has come to our knowledge. Although his arguments had been used and confuted many times before he existed, and have been thoroughly answered since, yet this book seems to possess astonishing charms for thousands of young men, who never perhaps read the whole Bible in their lives, and who never read any full and reputed defence of it. Are they ready to make up their judgement upon a partial examination of one side only? If so, let us tell them to turn/ round and look on the other side, till they give the subject in all its bearings as close an examination as did those cool,

acute, accurate, and lucid investigators, Locke and Newton. How preposterous for our young upstarts in philosophy, and a multitude of wonderful "smart fellows" through our country, who are totally ignoraut both of the Scriptures and their evidence, to assume to assail the revelation of Heaven, and to cavil about things above their own limited comprehension.

Let true philosophy, chastened and humbled by reflection, come to the investigation, and the Scriptures have nothing to fear from the result. There are two general causes of infidelity, one is an unwillingness to believe, and the other is a neglect to examine the arguments thoroughly on both sides. And if we should succeed in these numbers in inducing some to peruse some of the able and correct authors, that have written in defence of the Bible, it is all we expect.

THE END.

ERRATA.

Some small literary errours have passed the press, the most inportant of which the reader is requested to correct, thus:

Page 49, 17th line from bottom, for if the gospel is ccer, read, if the gospel be ever.

66

66

82, 10th line from bottom, for orthodoxy, read, orthodox. 163, 15th line from bottom, for believe, read belief.

"183, 16th line from bottom, for who should, read, who shall.

212, 5th line from bottom, for is the heavens, read, are the heavens.

214, 13th line from top omit the word have.

304, 3d line from bottom, for sufficiency, read, incfficiency,