at his feet, and were trained more or less prehend it. It is one of the prominent and in his habits of thinking; and yet never remarkable features of this controversy that was there a book less entitled than the ancient names no longer stand for the an"Confessions of an Inquiring Spirit" to the cient things which before they expressed, honour of effecting a revolution in theology, and that in the vocabulary of recent discusor becoming the manifesto of any school of sions the terms, revelation and inspiration, inquirers accustomed to habits of sound and have so entirely changed their signification accurate reasoning. With not a little to re- as to mean the very opposite well nigh of mind us of the reach and originality of what they meant before. Under the shelter thought which distinguish the other writ- of this ambiguity, a considerable portion of ings of Coleridge, it is marked to a most the argument or declamation of recent opvicious excess with looseness and inaccuracy ponents of Scripture infallibility, amounts of conception; it betrays a painful ignor- to not much more than an attempt—oftenance of the main facts and fundamental times a dexterous, though it may be unconprinciples involved in the question at issue; scious one-to shift the conditions of the and, by the confident, but impotent attempt problem, and misstate the status questionis. which he makes to marry a mystical philo- Without attempting, then, to traverse the sophy to an unsound theology, he only wide field which the question of the inspirshows that he has strayed into a province of ation of Scripture opens up, or to enter into speculation with whose guiding landmarks details, which, on such a subject, it would he was completely unacquainted. Nor is be impossible and endless to do, it may not this failure to grasp, and inability to deal be unimportant to endeavour to indicate with, the necessary conditions of the pro- the position which the advocates of a plenary blem to be solved, so conspicuous in Cole- inspiration desire and undertake to defend, ridge's discussion of the doctrine of inspira- and to point out the general principles of tion, altogether due to his limited and de- argument and evidence by which the confective preparation for dealing with the sub-troversy must be adjudged. ject; it is in no small measure to be attri- These two propositions, taken together, buted to the exigencies of his position and exhibit, as we believe, the substance of the argument. In bondage to the school and immemorial and all but universal doctrine habits of a merely subjective philosophy, of the Church of Christ in regard to the inand bent on reducing and assimilating his spired Scriptures. In the first place, they theology to the same standard and form, contain a communication of truth from God, his very position imposed upon him the supernaturally given to man; and in the temptation, or rather the necessity, of dis- second place, they contain that truth supercarding almost everything objective from naturally transferred to human language, his doctrine of inspiration, and even of re- and therefore free from all mixture or addivelation. In doing this, he has of necessity tion of error. These two propositions make missed the real point in debate, and substi- up the whole of that doctrine on the subject tuted for that ancient article of the Church, of inspiration, for which it is necessary or which asserts an external revelation and a important to contend, and embody or imply real inspiration of it, the modern theory of all that we mean by the assertion, that the au inward and subjective illumination. The Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments same subjective tendencies have led to are all, and are alone, the infallible Word of similar results in the case of almost every God. It is plain that these two positions writer in recent times, who has rejected and are perfectly distinct and different from each repudiated the former doctrine on the sub- other, and the one of them may be mainject of the infallibility of Scripture. Under tained while the other is denied. But the the name of revelation, or under the name two taken together, and not disjoined, are of inspiration, they have advocated and dis- necessary to make up the full idea of inspirguised principles and views, which, in one ed Scripture, which is virtually denied in its shape or other, and to a greater or less ex- true import, when the one or the other is tent, evacuate both of the objective element rejected. The distinction between the two that truly belongs to them, and make reve- things, which we call respectively a revelalation to be no longer a real communication tion and an inspiration, has often been pointcoming to man ab extra, and from God, but ed out with more or less accuracy, and is only a discovery of truth generated within essential to a right understanding of the himself; and inspiration to be no longer a controversy; but it has still oftener been supernatural influence from above, guiding overlooked, or partially set aside; and the and qualifying a prophet truly to record the mistake has occasioned much misunderstandrevelation given, but only the inward illu- ing and confusion in the adjustment of the mination of his nature to enable him to ap-question at issue. The two are to be dis tinguished both as regards their own nature tempt, made by too many, to explain the and the historical fact of their being given to manner or form in which the revelation and men. Revelation refers to the idea origin- inspiration were effected. Both processes ally dwelling in the Divine mind, and then are supernatural, and, because they are so, supernaturally communicated or .presented cannot be explained. From the very nato the mind of the prophet who receives it. ture of the case, we must be contented to Inspiration refers to the process by which know nothing of the "divers manners" in the prophet was supernaturally enabled, which the Divine influence came upon and without failure or defect, to transfer the overshadowed those holy men of old, who idea or truth, thus given him from God, to spake as they were moved by the Holy the oral or written language in which it Ghost. We have no sympathy with those might become accessible to others. Reve- writers, who, like Dr. Henderson, parcel out lation may exist without inspiration, and, in the supernatural influences of the Spirit into point of fact, is found in those cases record- artificial and purely hypothetical modes of ed in Scripture, in which communications action, and tell us minutely when the revewere made from God to His creatures, lation came to the prophet by "direct intermeant for themselves alone, and not for nal suggestion," and when by "audible artiothers; and which were either never com- culate sounds," and when again by "Urim municated to others at all, or communicated and Thummim," and how often by "dreams" without the supernatural aid which would and at what time by "visions," and when, have excluded error or defect in the commu- once more, by the "reappearance of the denication. We can easily conceive that the parted." We have a more serious objecwhole of the revelation given by God might tion to this pretended explanation of the have been given upon this latter principle, supernatural, than merely that the explainer thus exhibiting the example of a real and is wearying himself in vain by attempting true communication from God to the reci- to do what cannot be done, and to render pient, but a communication afterwards left intelligible what must ever be mysterious. to the chance of being made known, wholly We believe that from this source has originor partially, perfectly or imperfectly, to ated that apparent diversity in the testimoothers, by the merely natural powers of ny of the Church as to the inspiration of memory and judgment and expression of Scripture, which has been eagerly laid hold the human instrument. This is quite a con- of by the opponents of it, for the purpose of ceivable case. But as prophets received the alleging that that testimony was divided word of revelation, not for themselves, but and contradictory as to the infallibility of for others; as it was primarily intended for the Word of God. When men begin to the benefit, not of the one to whom it was speculate upon the modes of the supernaoriginally given, but of the many who were tural, and when theologians are tempted to to take it from his hands; as it was more dogmatise upon the manner in which the important by far that it should be transmit- processes of revelation and inspiration were ted in infallible purity to the whole of man- effected, it is impossible for them to speak kind, than to the few who were made the alike, just because they speak of what they instruments of transmitting it, we would know not;-a diversity of language and have been entitled, independently of the opinion on the subject is unavoidable. direct evidence to the fact, to argue, with the hence, in the case of the inspiration of Scripstrongest probability, that the revelation ture, a diversity is manifest, even among which, in a supernatural manner, was trans- those who are at one in holding the truth of ferred ab extra from the mind of God to the an infallible Bible, when they come to specumind of the prophet at first, would be, in a late as to the mode in which it became inmanner not more supernatural, again trans- fallible; opinion varying under the influence ferred with equal purity to that infallible of different schools of thinking, and oscillatrecord from which it might shine upon the minds of others. The advocates of a plenary inspiration believe that they find direct of this Article, we welcome one of the most interevidence in the Word of God to bear out esting and valuable contributions recently made tothis conclusion; and they maintain that the wards a right settlement of this controversy on inScriptures therefore are not only a superna- spiration. But we regret to see in it a tendency in tural revelation from God, but also a super-tempt to explain what cannot be explained in the the direction above indicated, in the form of an atnatural inspiration by God. The very import of these two propositions, which embody the ancient and ortho dox doctrine of the Church on the subject discountenances, or rather forbids, the at And *In the work of Mr. Lee mentioned at the head matter, as, for example, in his fourth Lecture, when he endeavours, not very successfully or intelligibly to us, to lay down the law generally observed in the development of revelation, and to describe the "character of the ecstatic condition" of the prophet who received it. ing continually between the two opposite meaning by that, not the words that He poles, of what has been come to be known spake, or the doctrine He preached, or the recently, as the mechanical and dynamical truth He communicated, but in His person; theories. That unguarded and indefensible and the New Testament Scriptures are no language has been employed on both sides more a communication from God, through in this matter, cannot be denied; that in many cases it embodied speculations as to the modus agendi of the Spirit of God in fashioning that volume which came from Him, forbidden alike by the silence of Scripture and the teaching of a sound philosophy, may be safely affirmed; but all this leaves untouched the undoubted fact, that the Church of Christ, from its earliest times, has held fast by the twofold doctrine, that the Bible is the combined and harmonious result of a revelation which conveyed to the mind of the prophet, in a supernatural manner, the truth which dwelt in the mind of God, and of an inspiration which enabled the prophet to transfer once more the truth so given him, without error or deficiency, to the page of a written record for the benefit of others. A very moderate acquaintance with the controversy is sufficient to convince any one of how very far modern speculations in theology, both at home and abroad, have advanced in the direction of setting aside the doctrine both of a revelation from God, and of an inspiration by God, in the true sense of these terms. His selected servants, than are the writings 66 And In regard to a supernatural revelation, the plain and intelligible position of the English Deists a century and a half ago, who made nature and reason the only source of truth, and held the Bible to be a forgery, has in substance and virtually been revived under the disguise of modern speculation, while the name of Deism is disowned as bygone and obsolete. We need not refer to the extreme section of Rationalists in Germany, in whose name Wigschieder tells us that a superna tural and miraculous revelation is a thing inconsistent with the character of God; but who still maintain a "revelatio naturalis," the origin of which is to be found in the native endowments of the human mind when trained under favourable circumstances, and of which revelation the Bible, after rejecting all that is supernatural in it, is to some uncertain and indefinitely small amount One and all of these theories, prominently the possible product.* Even the school of ventilated as they have been, not only in Schleiermacher, of which it has been boasted theological discussions, but also in the curby his admirers that it was the main instru- rent literature of the day, point in one diment in elevating the religious life of Ger-rection; and, when legitimately und logicmany out of the slough of that extreme Ra- ally carried out, amount to a contradiction tionalism, after rejecting the Divine authority of the Old Testament, makes revelation to reside not in the Bible but in Christ, * Institutiones Theologiæ, p. 57, etc. *Parker's Discourses on Matters pertaining to Religion, p. 161, etc. The Soul. By Francis W. Newman, p. 59. of the article which lies at the very founda- | given to inspired men; nor the discoveries tion of the Church's creed in every age, and of spiritual things, which are the result of which declares the Bible to be a proper re- the former, of the same infallibility with the velation from God, in the true and ancient revelations given to prophets by the latter. sense of the words. Whatever minor dif- In those gracious operations of the Divine ferences belong to such theories, they agree Spirit which are vouchsafed to believers, to in this, that they all tend (consciously or un- lead them into the truth and to keep them consciously to their authors) to a denial of in the truth, we can discover no adequate the objective element in revelation, making substitute for that supernatural power which it wholly a subjective thing, and constituting came upon prophets and apostles of old, man and not God the source of truth to him- bringing them into the secret place of the self. Under the teaching of such doctrines, Most High, and filling them with His Word; the Bible is seen to be a revelation of know- and as little can we recognise in the thoughts ledge ab intus, and not ab extra—a discovery and feelings of Christian men written in a by man himself of, it may be, religious book, even in the case of those who know truth, but not a communication of truth the most of God and err the least, that unsupernaturally granted from on high. Come created wisdom which dwelt with Him from from what quarter of his spiritual and intel- eternity, and which in the fulness of time lectual being the di covery may, and aided was embodied in human speech. In short, by whatsoever happy and favourable train- the Bible is a revelation, in the ancient and ing in the school of nature, or even of grace, orthodox sense of the term, God-given and still these theories virtually make man and not man-given; and stands single and alone not God the revealer, if revelation it is to be in the circle of written thought, as much as called at all. We may be indebted for the He stands alone and unapproachable in the religious knowledge which has found its way circle of being. into the Bible from its writers, to the “ reveThe defenders of the supreme authority latio naturalis" which belongs to them, and and plenary truth of the Scriptures, are at to all, according to Wigschieder, or to the the very least entitled to choose their own "Christian consciousness" of Schleiermacher, position in the controversy, and to define or to the "religious sentiment" congenital to their own terms; and then to offer in deman of Parker, or to the "spiritual insight" fence of their doctrine what evidence they of Newman, or to the "religious intuitions" of can. We are not disposed to accept under. Morell; but from whatsoever similar source, the name of revelation what is no true reveor under whatsoever dissimilar name it lation at all, and which, if we accepted it, comes, it is human truth, and not Divine. were not worth the maintaining. We are We do not tarry to point out the wretched not prepared to admit, without some show and insecure foundation on which his faith of proof, any theory which would repudiate must rest, when fallen man becomes the all that is objective in a revelation, and cut great teacher to himself; for of such in- off the prophet from the everlasting and only structors it may be said, that the blind are unerring source of light, and constrain him leading the blind, and that both shall fall to draw from his own heart the revelations into the ditch. But more than this: it is of Divine things, and make the Bible the quite plain that no modification even of any child of his religious feelings and discernsuch theory, which admits of the interven- ment only, and compel others to seek their tion of the influences of the Spirit of God, knowledge of saving truth from the recorded such as are common to Christian men, can experience of a spiritual but erring man like avail to redeem it from utter rejection. The themselves. This is no question about Christian consciousness, or the spiritual in- words simply, or as to what is the more sight, or the religious intuitions, may be accurate use of the term revelation. The originally developed, and subsequently ele- real question between us and the advocates vated and maintained, by those gracious in- of such theories, is as to whether or not we fluences of the Spirit from on high which are shall be constrained to accept the Bible as shared by believers and not by others; but containing a record of the thoughts and feelthe products of such an illumination, how-ings of the Eternal One, or rather as a record ever great in the shape of religious know- of the thoughts and feelings of men like ourledge or discernment of Divine truth, are not to be named without blasphemy as the same in authority or certainty with the proper revelations of the Eternal Word. The special influences of the Spirit of God, common to Christian men, are not the same as the supernatural influences of the Spirit, selves, taught, it may be, in the school of nature or of grace, but taught only in part, and receiving the lesson not without imperfection and sin. And the question is as to a matter of fact, and must be so dealt with. Did the penmen of Scripture record in its pages a communication which they got in a direct and supernatural manner from God, | tion, in the true sense of the word, and in or truths which they drew exclusively from the other it does not. And the question the recesses of their own hearts, sanctified between the opposite controversialists in and illuminated, it may be, by those influ- this debate is as to a matter of fact, which ences of the Spirit which are common to all no clever shifting of names or jugglery as to true Christians? In writing that book words can get rid of, viz., whether or not which we call the Bible, was their eye turned the penmen of Scripture actually received up to the fountain of uncreated light for the such a supernatural communication from truths that they wrote, or turned solely God, and then recorded it in its page? within upon their own beliefs and feelings as When the question is thus stated, it is the fountain of knowledge to them? Did easily seen that the debate can be brought the authors of the sacred volume write down to a short and decisive issue; and it affords in it a transcript of the thoughts of God, only another illustration of the fact, which given them miraculously by God, or did the history of theological controversy has they only and solely write down a transcript so often exemplified, that the forms of error of their own, given them, it may be, in part are infinite in number, but that its substance by that special but not supernatural illumin- is often one and the same from age to age. ation of the Spirit which every believer When the combatants are marshalled and shares alike? In thus stating the question ordered, and their respective positions adas between the advocates and opponents of justed, we soon come to find out that the a true and proper revelation, as contained in strife of these modern and noisy speculators the Bible, we do not need to burden it with is in reality very much the old fight, which the further question of whether or not the has been fought from the beginning, as to prophet who wrote the revelation given un- whether or not God has actually given us a derstood it himself, and in the act of receiv- communication of His mind and will from ing from God a communication of the Divine heaven. Let us deal with this as a question thoughts, was enabled to make them his own of fact, and apply to the discussion of it those before recording them. It may or it may principles and laws of evidence by which not have been so. But whether the pro- other questions of fact are determined. phet understood the revelation or not, it is Moses can say whether or not he was inmost important to bear in mind that a reve- formed in a supernatural manner by God of lation, in the only proper sense of the term, the history of the creation and the six days' and in the sense in which it is used by the work, or whether he drew the whole matedefenders of the infallibility of the Bible, is rials of the narrative from the region of his a very different thing from the understand-"religious consciousness;" and this fact, ing or apprehension of its meaning. From which Moses was competent to tell, his conthe express statements of Scripture itself, temporaries were competent to test by the and from the nature of the matters revealed, usual methods and principles of evidence by it is undeniable that in many cases the pro- which a man's honesty and veracity as a phets who recorded the revelation did not witness are tested, so as to judge with cerunderstand its import, being left like other tainty whether Moses told them what was men to their own unaided and natural facul- true or not. The Apostle Paul was competies to study and search out what the Spirit tent to tell whether he had "received of the of Christ which was in them did signify. Lord," the account of the Lord's Supper, This is admitted, indeed, to be true in re- which we find recorded in the Epistle to the gard to some portions of the Bible by all, Corinthians, or whether it was all due to his with the exception of a section of reckless "spiritual insight," common to him, with and extreme impugners of its veracity. It every Christian man; and the Corinthians is a palpable fallacy, then, to identify the were then, and we now are, able, by the objective truth presented by God to the pro- common rules of evidence, historical and phet, and drawn out of the storehouse of otherwise, to say whether the letter, which His eternal wisdom, with the subjective ap- embodies Paul's assertion as to the point, is prehension of its meaning, which those who an authentic and credible document, worthy recorded it in Scripture might or might not to be believed. In short, the way out of the possess. The transcript of the thoughts of dilemma of a subjective "revelation," which, the Divine mind impressed upon the sacred because it bears the old name, and is yet not page by the instrumentality of the prophet, the old thing, is so perplexing and mystifyqualified miraculously to record it, is a very ing to uninitiated understandings, is just the different thing from the transcript upon the ancient and beaten track which the weary same page of the perfect or imperfect appre- feet of Christian apologists have so often hension of it in the mind of the writer. The trod. Is it possible for God to make a record, in the one case, contains a revela-supernatural communication of His will to |