Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB
[graphic][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small]

EVANGELICAL MAGAZINE,

AND

Theological Review.

MARCH, 1822.

BIOGRAPHY OF JOHN ALLEN, M. D.
[With a Portrait.]

Or the respectable minister, whose
portrait we have given with this month's
Magazine, we find but very few mate-
rials, that can contribute to gratify
curiosity, or minister information. His
contemporaries, though they respected
his talents and character, and held his
person in high estimation, appear to
have been culpably regardless of his
biography. We have no information
of the place of his nativity, nor of his
birth and education; and the first men-
tion that we find made of him, is as
pastor of an Independent congregation
at Shrewsbury, where he was the imme-
diate predecessor of Mr. John Dobson.
From Shrewsbury he removed to Nails-
worth, in Gloucestershire, where he
continued only a short time, being in
vited to take the pastoral charge of the
church in New Broad Street, London,
whither he removed in the autumn of
the year 1730. Here he resided for
several years, maintaining a high repu-
tation, and greatly esteemed by persons
different denominations. He is said
to have possessed considerable abilities,
and was a faithful, judicious, and accep-
table preacher. In his religious senti-
ments he was a moderate Calvinist;
not verging either to the extremes of
Arminianism or of Antinomianism..
Mr. Allen possessed considerable

VOL. VIII.

skill in physic; in which science he took his degree as Doctor of Medicine. As a writer, he does not appear to have been eminently distinguished. His publications in the theological department are confined to about half a dozen single sermons, of which four are of the funereal cast. In the year 1749, he accepted an invitation from the Presbyterian church in Hanover Street, Long Acre, then under the ministry of Dr. Earle, to become afternoon preacher, his own church not assembling on that part of the Lord's day. This connection Dr. Allen retained about ten years, but resigned it in 1759, when he was succeeded by the late Dr. Savage. About the same time, he relinquished his connection with the congregation at Broad Street, and retired to Worcester, on an invitation to accept the pastoral charge of a congregation in that city, which had become destitute by the decease of Mr. Benjamin Carpenter. He continued at Worcester about five years, but resigned in 1764, and returned to London, where he lived about ten years in retirement from ministerial duties, and ended his days on Dec. 31st, 1774, in the 73rd year of his age. His remains were interred in Bunhill Fields, where, upon a flat tombstone, is the following inscription.

The Rev. DOCTOR ALLEN,
Who departed this life, Dec. 31st, 1774,
In the 73rd year of his age.

"Well done, thou good and faithful servant."

ON THE INSPIRARION OF THE

SCRIPTURES.

[From Mr. Robert Haldane's Evidence and Authority of Divine Revelation, vol. i. p.134, &c.]

THE Scriptures of the Old and New Testament are not only genuine and authentic, but also inspired, writings. The claim of inspiration which they advance, is a claim of infallibility and of perfection. It is also a claim which demands unlimited submission. It is a claim which, if set up for any other book, may, with the utmost ease, be shewn to be unfounded.

The inspiration of the Scriptures is attested both by the nature and value of their contents, and by the evidence of their truth. On these grounds, they stand without a rival in the world, and challenge from every man the highest possible regard.

Our knowledge of the inspiration of the Bible, like every other doctrine it contains, must be collected from itself. If the writers of this book appear with such credentials as entitle them to be received as commissioned of God, then it is from themselves alone we can learn those truths which they are authorised to make known. Among these, it is of primary importance to know what is the extent of that dependence which we are to place on their words. Is implicit credit to be given to every thing they declare? and, if the writers are numerous, is this equally due to them all?

It has been contended, that different degrees of inspiration are to be attributed to different parts of the word of God. To some places belongs, as it is supposed, an inspiration of superintendence; to others, of elevation ; and to the rest of suggestion.*

one.

mation of any part of them being written under an inspiration of any kind but "All Scripture," says Paul, "is given by inspiration of God." This declaration of Paul refers to the whole of the Old Testament, which Timothy had known from his childhood. But as part of the New Testament was at that time written, and as the whole of it is uniformly classed by its writers with the Old Testament, this expression of Paul's equally applies to the New Testament. The Apostle Peter classes all the Epistles of Paul, which he ascribes to the wisdom given to him, with "the other Scriptures," thereby declaring them to be of the same authority with the rest, and shewing that all the writings, both of Old and New Testament, went by the name of "Scriptures."

Inspiration belongs to the original writings. No one contends for any degree of inspiration to the transcribers in different ages. Accuracy in the copies they have made is, under God, secured by the fidelity of the keepers of Scripture, by the opposition of parties watching each other, as of Jews and Christians, and of various sects, and by the great multiplication of copies and translations into different languages, which took place so early. The agreement among the ancient manuscripts, both of the old and New Testaments, has been ascertained, by the strictest examination, to be astonishingly exact.

with

The inspiration spoken of in the book of Job, xxxii. 8, where it is said, "There is a spirit in men, and the inspiration of the Almighty giveth them understanding," appears to refer to the communication of those intellectual powers which man is endowed by his Creator. To this view of the matter, though Every Christian has, besides, an unction very generally adopted, the writers of the from the Holy Spirit, who dwelleth in Scriptures give no countenance what-him, through whom he was born again, ever. This being the case, and as the question of inspiration can only be determined by the Scriptures themselves, all the distinctions that have been introduced are mere theories, unfounded and unsupported by any evidence. The Scriptures uniformly assert the highest degree of inspiration, and give no inti*The subject of "Inspiration" is discussed at great length, and certainly with great ability, by MR. HARTWELL HORNE, in his Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures," vol. i. p. 245-574; yet the whole disquisition unhappily closes with admitting the fact, here censured and refuted, viz. that there are different kinds and degrees of inspiration, and that the apostle Paul sometimes wrote and delivered his private judgment as an uninspired man! which is in effect giving up the importance of all that he has said upon the subject.-EDIT.

and by whose influence his spiritual life is maintained. There have been also various miraculous gifts of the Holy Spirit bestowed on the servants of God, and among these is that inspiration by means of which God has revealed himself in the Old and New Testaments. This inspiration, which, without any va

}

riation or exception, is claimed by the writers of the Scriptures, and which entitles the whole of them to be called "the word of God," is of the highest kind, by which they were "led into all truth." It consists in that communication made to their minds by the Spirit of God, of the ideas and words which they have engrossed in that sacred book. Nothing can more distinctly give us the true idea of inspiration, than these words in Acts iv. 25, "Who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said."

This view of the matter does not require us to suppose that, under this full inspiration, the ordinary exercise of the faculties of the writers was counteracted or suspended, or that their minds did not entirely go along with the ideas and words which were communicated to them. Nor is it any objection, that the words of Scripture are not considered unalterable, as may be shewn from parallel passages, or by the quotations from the Old Testament in the New, where they are sometimes made rather according to the sense than in the express words. The meaning undoubtedly is the great thing to be attended to; but that meaning will be either mis-stated or obscured, if words perfectly fit for the occasion are not always used.

Neither does the difference of style which we find among these writers at all conclude against their having the very words they were to write imparted to them. The style that was most proper was used, and the instruments employed were such, we may suppose, as that style

was

entirely natural to, flowing, like the words, with the full consent, and according to the particular tone of their minds. Accordingly, the whole appears to have been carried on in consistency with the full conviction and approbation, as far as they understood what they said, of the writers themselves, yielding to the impression made on their minds as voluntary and intelligent agents. Nor is it any objection to the inspiration of words as well as ideas, that they often knew beforehand those things which they wrote, and were directed to refer to this knowledge of circumstances to establish their credibility; nor that they often appeal, in support of what they say, to its own evidence, or reason from principles granted by those whom they addressed; all which was entirely consistent with that "reasonable service," to which they were employed to call upon men to submit.

This full inspiration of the Scriptures is frequently denied, on the supposition" that the Apostles themselves "sometimes candidly admit, that they are not speaking by inspiration, or that their inspiration is not of the highest kind." The candour of the Apostles is unquestionable; but this objection proceeds on a mistaken view of the meaning of the passages on which it is built.

In the viith chapter of the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, the Apostle Paul is supposed in some places to disclaim inspiration, and, in one place, not be certain whether he is inspired or not. At first sight, this will appear to be evidently contrary to the uniform style of this Apostle's writings, and very improbable, when, as a commissioned and accredited ambassador of Jesus Christ, he is answering certain questions put to him by a Christian church, to whom he had just before asserted, in the most explicit inanner, that he spoke "not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth;" and that he was addressing them "in the name of the Lord Jesus." Attention to these things might have prevented the adoption of the unfounded and mistaken meaning which has been affixed to the passages referred to. If just, it would tend to unsettle the minds of Christians respecting the inspiration of the Scriptures, and to render it uncertain when the Apostles speak as inspired men, and when they deliver a doubtful opinion of their own. No such indecision, however, attaches to the passages in question.

In answer to the question about marriage, Paul says, "I speak this by permission, and not of commandment." Does this mean, that the Spirit permitted him, but did not command, him to give the answer he had done? If the Spirit permitted this answer to be given, it must be according to the mind of the Spirit; for Paul could not have been permitted to say what was contrary to it.

But this would have been a very extraordinary and unusual way of communicating that mind, and is plainly not what is here intended. The obvious meaning is, that what the Apostle here said was in the way of permission, not of commandment. "I speak this," says he, "as a permission, and not as a commandment." Again, at the 10th verse"Unto the married I command, yet not I, but the Lord." This commandment had been delivered by the Lord Jesus

himself. The Apostle, therefore, had no new commandment to deliver to them, or no commandment from himself, but one which the Lord had given. "To the rest," says he, "speak I, not the Lord." Here there was no former commandment given by the Lord, to which he might refer them. On this point, therefore, he himself now delivers to them the will of God. Indeed, so far was this commandment from having been given before, that it was a repeal of an old one, by which, under the Jewish dispensation, the people were commanded to put away their wives, if unbelievers. Can it be supposed that the Apostle is speaking from himself, and not under the direction of the Holy Ghost, when he is declaring the abrogation of what had been once the law of God?

"Now, concerning virgins, I have no commandment of the Lord; but I give my judgment as one that hath obtained mercy of the Lord, to be faithful." Here again no commandment had been formerly given, to which he could refer them; but he gave his judgment, or "sentence," as one who was faithful to the charge committed to him. "I think also that I have the Spirit of God." In this, as in many other passages, the word translated, "I think," does not mean doubting, but certainty. If Paul meant it to be understood, that he was uncertain whether he was inspired or not, it would contradict all he has so often asserted on the subject of his inspiration. But so far from its being the case, and in order the more deeply to impress their minds with the importance of what he had said, he concludes by assuring them, that he was certain he wrote by the Spirit of God.

The only other passage in which this Apostle is supposed to disclaim inspiration, occurs in 2 Cor. xi. 17, "That which I speak, I speak it not after the Lord, but as it were foolishly, in this confidence of boasting." In this passage Paul does not refer to the authority, but to the example of the Lord. "I speak not according to the example or manner of the Lord, but after the manner of fools;" a manner which, as he tells them in the next chapter, they had compelled him to adopt.

Another passage in the First Epistle of Peter, i. 19, is frequently quoted, so as to invalidate the apostolic testimony. Just before this passage, Peter declares,

that on the mount of transfiguration, he and the other Apostles were eye witnesses of the majesty of Jesus Christ, and had heard the voice from heaven, which attested that he was the beloved Son of God. Yet, after this, Peter is supposed to refer Christians to the word of prophecy, as "more sure" than this testimony. Instead of this, which is evidently a very improper view of the passage, degrading to the testimony of the Apostles, he refers to the prophecies, now made more firm" or "confirmed" by their fulfilment.*

66

Two passages are quoted from Paul's Epistle to Timothy, 1 Tim. v. 23, “Drink no longer water, but use a little wine, for thy stomach's sake, and thine often infirmities." And 2 Tim. iv. 13, "The cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments." These passages, it is supposed, are of so unimportant a nature, that they cannot be the dictates of inspiration. Such a conclusion, however, is altogether unwarranted. The Epistles, although written by the inspired ambassadors of Christ, often refer to the private business and circumstances, both of the writers, and of those to whom they wrote. It has pleased God to give a great part of the instruction contained in the Scriptures in this way, which is manifestly the most practical method. If then a particular expression may not seem to us to be of such importance as to entitle it to a place in the revelation of God, or worthy of being inspired by him, we are not on that account warranted to con clude against its inspiration. In this way we might take the liberty to expunge many parts of the Scriptures; for instance, of the historical parts of the Old Testament, as appearing equally unimportant with the passages in question. But by doing this, we should take away part of what we are assured was all given by the inspiration of God.

By the first of the above passages, however, we may learn a most useful lesson, from the information it gives, not only of the abstemiousness of Timothy, but of the care of their bodily health, which the servants of God are authorised by him to take, when engaged in his service, and the concern, in this respect, they should have for one another. The other passage is to the same purpose, and shews that it was

* See a paper in our last No. illustrating this text, p. 43.--EDIT,

« AnteriorContinuar »