The Bride and Its Christ Being Noonday Talks With Business …

The Bride and Its Christ Being Noonday Talks With Business Men on Faith and Unbelief By R. A. T'orrey

Dean of the Bible.Institute ofLos Angels (Biola) from 1912 to 1924

Copyright and all rights therein are retained by authors or by other copyright holders. All persons copying this information are expected to adhere to the terms and constraints invoked by each author's copyright. In most cases, these works may not be reposted without the explicit permission of the copyright holder. Unauthorized copying and distribution is punishable by law (Title 17 of United States Code).

Dr. Reuben Archer Torrey

Reuben Archer Torrey, the son ofa banker, was born in New Jersey onjanuary 28, 1856. He entered Yale College at age 15 intending to become an attorney. After three years ofworldly involvement, he trusted Christ as his Savior and decided to enter the ministry. In 1875, he graduated with honors and that Fall entered the Yale Divinity School where he distinguished himself by \\rinning the Hebrew Award. In Torrey's senior year, D.L. J\Ioody, the great evangelist, spoke in chapel. Moody, unimpressed with Torrey's scholarly achievement, advised him: ''Young man, you'd better get to work for the Lord." Swallowing his pride, Torrey asked J\.foody to teach him how to lead someone to Christ. After giving Torrey and a few of his fellow students several verses of Scripture, !\foody charged, "Now gentlemen, go at it." Torrey did, leading to Christ a young lady whom he used to meet in the ballroom. That experience transformed his attitude toward the ministry. Torrey's conversion did not settle all his doubts, however. He was especially troubled by the Bible's account of the resurrection ofChrist. Could he really believe it? Torrey studied the evidence carefully, and found it overwhelming. There was no doubt that Christ had risen from the dead. "That conclusion, 11 he recalled, "carried everything with it that was essential. 11

After graduation from seminary, Torrey was ordained by the Congregational Church and served as pastor ofa

Congregational church in Ohio where he met his wife. Torrey then attended graduate school in Germany. He studied under Franz Delitzsch, the leading authority on Old Testament criticism and Hebrew in Germany and co-author ofthe famous Keil & Delitzsch Comrnen•tary on the Old Testament. Theodore Zahn, one of the foremost authorities on the New Testament and author ofthe monumental Introduction to the New Testament, was also one ofhis professors. During his studies abroad, Torrey settled the question ofwhether the Bible was the inspired and inerrant vVord ofGod. He knew he could trust it, and he never wavered again. For financial reasons Torrey was unable to finish his graduate work in Germany. Years later Wheaton College awarded him the Doctor of Divinity degree Gune 20, 1907). From Europe he went to Minneapolis where he pastored the Open Door Church and organized the People's Church (Congregational). At the same time he became superintendent ofthe city mission. This work gave him further seasoning in the ministry and showed him the power of the gospel to transform lives. Such a background produced a man who could handle himself and the Bible well, whether on skid row or among theological scholars. Said one biographer, "He could kneel beside a drunk in a mission or explain the gospel at an elegant dinner table." When tfoody was searching for a superintendent for his proposed Bible Institute in Chicago, he was advised to secure Torrey, which he did. Torrey designed the curriculum for the new Bible Institute which became the pattern for many all over

the world. In Chicago, Torrey authored several books and also pastored the Chicago Avenue Church Qater renamed the Moody Memorial Church), which Moody had established in 1564. From 1902 to 1905, Torrey toured the world conducting evangelistic campaigns in Australia, New Zealand,Japan, China, India, Scotland, Ireland, and England, as well as America. Dming their travels, multiplied thousands trusted Christ. In the summer of 1911, Torrey was invited to be the new dean ofthe Bible Institute ofLos Angeles. Torrey's biographer, Roger Martin, states, "His acceptance, however, included two stipulations. First, he stated that a church should be organized to function in much the same capacity as the Moody l\1emorial Church was to the Moody Bible Institute. Second, and more important, the auditorium of the Institute and church should be able to accommodate at least 3,500 people for evangelistic services." The reasons for these conditions were aptly stated by his son Reuben. "He considered this essential for the more adequate training ofthe students as a practical laboratory, and also it would enable him to continue the evangelistic preaching mission to which he believed God had called him. It would also make possible a strong evangelical witness in the heart ofLos Angeles and serve as a platform from which conservative leaders from around the world could be heard."

He gained a most enthusiastic reception on the part of the Institute faculty and student body. The King's Business, stated, "The coming ofDr. Torrey to our Bible Institute marks a new era in the progress of our work.... \Vhen we felt the need and commenced to pray for a dean, we asked ofthe Lord the best man available for such an important position, but we had not thought the Lord would give us the biggest as well as the best." Under his direction the Institute became widely known as a well-equipped, well-staffed and well-conducted Christian school. Torrey's vision for the Institute was to unite theory and practice in Christian activity in addition to specialized Biblical training. One ofDr. Torrey's noteworthy achievements was the adoption of a clear and concise Statement of Doctrine adopted by the Board ofDirectors, which is still the official statement of Doctrine held by Biola University.

.New York: 158 Fifth Avenue Chicago: 80 Wabash Avenue Toronto : 27 Richmond Street, W. London : 21 Paternoster Square Ebinburgh : 200 Prince, Street

CONTENTS

IPA.g I. ONE RusoN WHY I BELIEVE THE BmLE To BE 1 II. Two Mo'RE REAllONS WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE THE WORD OF GOD TO BE THE WORD OF GoD • 17 III. FouR MouRusoNs WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE 29 IV. THREE MORE REASONS WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE TO BE THE WoRD OF Goo • 43 TO BE THE WORD OP GOD • •

INTRODUCTION

THE addresses in this book have been delivered to large audiences of business and professional men in cities and large towns in Australia, New Zealand, Tasmania, England, Scotland, and Ire land. Many who have been helped by them have urged me to put them into book form in order that they may be preserved for reference, and that they may be circu1ated among friends, hence this volume. In Melbourne the Town Hall was packed with 2500 men of all classes at the noon hour each day to listen to these addresses. In Sydney I am told that in the crowd that thronged the Centenary Hall there were many prominent busi ness men and members of both Houses of the Legislature, who gave up their mid-day meal each day to attend. In Great Britain and Ire Jand men very prominent in commercial and professional life, a large number of University men, both professors and students, have spoken to me of the help that has come to them from these addresses, not a few having been shaken in their faith by the critical discussions of the present day. Many agnostics, skeptics, Uni tarians, and destructive critics have testified publicly to having been led by these lectures to Yb

·,m

INTRODUCTION give up their former erroneous positions. I have been especially encouraged by the number of my brethren in the ministry who have testified in pub lic and private of the help received. I pray that these addresses may be used in this printed form to lead many thousands more out into the light and strength that come from faith in the Bible and in the Christ of the Bible.

FIRST TALK

ONE REASON WHY I :BELIEVE THE :BIBLE TO :BE THE WORD OF GOD most important question in religious thought is, "Is the Bible the \Vord of God?,, If the Bible is the Word of God, an absolutely trustworthy revelation from God Himself d Himself, His purposes and His will, of man's duty and destiny of spiritual and eternal realities, then we have a starting-point from which we can proceed to the conquest of the whole domain of religious truth. But if the Bible is not the '\Vord of God, if it is the mere product of man's think ing, speculating, and guessing, not altogether trustworthy in regard to religious and eternal truth, then we are all at sea, not knowing whither we are drifting, but we may be sure that we are not drifting toward any safe port. I did not always believe the Bible to be the Word of God. I sincerely doubted that the Bible was the Word of God. I doubted that Jesus Christ was the Son of God. I doubted whether there was a personal God. I was not an infidel-I was a skeptic. I did not deny-I questioned. I was· not an atheist-I was an agnostic. I did not know, but I determined to find out. If there was a God, I determined to THE

TALKS TO MEN find that out, and act accordingly. If there was not a God, I determined to find that out, and act accordingly. If Jesus Christ was the Son of God, I detennined to find that out, and act ac cordingly. If Jesus Christ was not the Son of God, I determined to find that out, and act ac cordingly. If the Bible was the Word of God, I determined to find that out, and act accord ingly ; and if the Bible was not the Word of God, I determined to find that out, and act ac cordingly. I found out. I found out beyond a peradventure that there is a God, that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that the Bible is the Word of God. To-day it is with me not a mat ter of mere probability, nor even of mere belief, but of absolute certainty. I am going to give you some of the reasons why I believe the Bible to be the Word of God. Not all the reasons-it would take months to do that; not even the reasons which are most con clusive to me personally, for these are of such a personal and experimental character that they cannot be conveyed to another. But I will give you reasons that will prove conclusive to any candid seeker after the truth, to anyone who desires to know the truth and is willing to obey it. They will not convince one who is deter mined not to know the truth, or who is unwill ing to obey it. If one will not receive the love of the truth, he must be left to his own deliberate choice of error, and given over to strong de-

WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE 8 lusion to believe a lie. But if one is searching for the truth, no matter how completely he is in the fog to-day, he can be led into the truth. I believe the Bible to be the Word of God, first of all, because of the testimony of Jesus Christ to that fact. We live in a day in which many men say that they accept the teaching of Jesus Christ, but that they do not accept the teaching of the whole Bible; that they believe what Jesus Christ says, but as to what Moses said, or is said to have said, and what Isaiah said, or is said to have said, and what Jeremiah said, and Paul said, and John said, and the rest of the Bible writers, they do not know about that. This position may at the first glance seem rational, but, in point of £act, it is utterly irra tional. If we accept the teaching of Jesus Christ, we must accept the whole Bible, for Jesus Christ has set His stamp of His authority upon the entire Book, and if we accept His au thority, we must accept all that upon which He sets the stamp of His authority. As to Christ's endorsement of the Old Testa ment, turn first of all to Mark vii. 13. Jesus has just quoted from the Law of Moses, not merely from the Ten Commandments, but from other portions of the Law of Moses as well. He has set over against the teaching of the Law of Moses the traditions of the Pharisees and Scribes, and in this verse He says, You do make

4 TALKS TO MEN " the Word of God of none effect throughout your tradition." Here He distinctly calls the Law of Moses the" Word of God." It is often times said that the Bible nowhere claims to be the Vil ord of God. Here Jesus Christ Himself distinctly asserts that the Law of Moses is the Word of God. If, then, we accept the authority of Jesus Christ, we must accept the Law of Moses as "the Word of God." Of course this only covers the :first five books of the Old Testa ment, but if we can accept this as the Word of God, we will have little difficulty with the rest of the Old Testament, for it is here that the hottest battle is being fought to-day. Tum again to Matthew v. 18. Here Jesus says, "Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in nowi!;e pass from the law until all be fulfilled." Now every Hebrew scholar knows that a " jot " is the Hebrew char acter " yodh," the smallest character in the He brew alphabet, less than half the size of any other character in the Hebrew alphabet, and that a "tittle" is a little horn that the Hebrews put on their consonants ; and here Jesus asserts that the Law of Moses as originally given is absolutely infallible down to its smallest letter and part of a letter. If, then, we accept the authority of Jesus Christ, we must accept the authority of the Law of Moses as originally given, and as contained in the Old Testament Scriptures. Tum next to John x. 35. Jesus has just

WHY I .BELIEVE THE .BIBLE 5 quoted in proof of a point which He is making from one of the Psalms, and adds, " The Scrip ture cannot be broken," thus setting the stamp of His authority upon the absolute irrefragability of the Old Testament Scriptures. Turn again to Luke xxiv. 27, and you will read that Jesus, " Beginning at Moses and all the prophets, ex pounded unto them s"n all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself "; and in the 44th verse He says, " All things must be fulfilled which were written in the Law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms." Now every scholar knows that the Jews divided their Bible (our present Old Testament Scriptures) into three parts: the law (the first five books of the Old Testament); the prophets (most of the books which we call prophetic, and some of those which we call historical); and the remaining books of the Old Testament, the Psalms or Sacred Writings. Jesus Christ takes up each one of these three recognized divisions of these Old Testament Scriptures and sets the stamp of His authority upon each of them. If, then we accept the authority of Jesus Christ, we are driven logically to accept the entire Old Testa"7 ment Scriptures. In Luke xvi. 31 Jesus says, " If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be per suaded though one be raised from the dead," thus in the most emphatic way indorsing the truth of the Old Testament Scriptures.

6 TALKS TO MEN In John v. 47 He says, "If ye believe not his [Moses'] writings, how shall ye believe :rvry words? " thus setting the &tamp of His authority upon the teaching of Moses as being as truly from God as was His own. V\ 7 e must then, if we accept the authority of Jesus Christ, accept the entire Old Testament. But how about the New Testament? Did Jesus set the stamp of His authority ~on it also? He did. But how could He when not a book of the New Testament was written when He de parted from this earth? By way of anticipation. Tum to John xiv. 26 and you will hear Jesus saying, "The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in My name, He shall teach you all things and bring all things to your remembrance whatsoever I have said unto you," thus setting the stamp of His au thority, not only upon the Apostolic teaching as given by the Holy Ghost, but upon the Apostolic recollection of what He Himself had taught. The question is often asked, " How do we know that in the Gospel records we have an accurate reproduction of the teaching of Jesus Christ? " It is asked, "Did the Apostles take notes at the time of what Jesus said? " There is reason to believe that they did, that Matthew and Peter, from whom Mark derived his material, and James (from whom, there is reason to believe, Luke obtained much of his material) took notes of what Jesus said in Aramaic, and that John

7 WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE took notes of what Jesus said in Greek, and that we have in the four Gospels the report of what they took down at the time. But whether this be true or not does not matter for our present ·purposes, for we have Christ's own authority for it that in the Apostolic records we have not the Apostles' recollection of what Jesus said, but the Holy Ghost's recollection of what Jesus said, and, while the Apostles might forget and report inaccurately, the Holy Ghost could not forget. Tum :furthermore to John xvi. I:2, 13, and you will hear Jesus saying, "I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. Howbeit when He, the Spirit of truth, is come, He will guide you into all truth." Here Jesus sets the stamp of His authority upon the teach ing of the AFQstles as being given by the Holy Ghost, as coritaining all the truth, and as contain ing more truth than His own teaching. He tells the Apostles that He has many things that He knows to tell them, but that they ax:e not ready yet to receive them, but that when the Holy Spirit comes, He will guide them into this fuller and larger truth. If then we accept the au thority of Jesus Christ, we must accept the Apos tolic teaching, the New Testament writings, as being given through the Holy Spirit, as contain ing all the truth, and as containing more truth than Jesus taught while on earth. There are many in our day crying, " Back to Christ," by

8 TALKS TO MEN which they usually mean," We do not care what Paul taught, or what John taught, or what James taught, or what Jude taught. We do not know about them. Let us go back to Christ, the original source of authority, and accept what He taught, and that alone." Very well, ., Back to Christ." The cry is not a bad one, but when you get back to Christ, you hear Christ Him self saying, " On to the Apostles. They have more truth to teach than I have taught. The Holy Spirit has taught them all the truth. Listen to them.'' If then we accept the authority of Jesus Christ, we are driven to accept the au thority of the entire New Testament. So then if we accept the teaching of Jesus Christ, we must accept the entire Old Testament aml the entire l..:J"ew Testament. It is either Christ and the whole Bible, or no Bible and no Christ. There are some in these days who say that they believe in Christ, but not in the Christ of the New Testament. But there is no Christ but the Christ of the New Testament. Any other Christ than the Christ of the New Testament is a pure figment of the imagination. Any other Christ than the Christ of the New Testament is an idol made by man's own fancy, and whoever worships him is an idolator. But we must accept the authority of Jesus Christ. He is accredited to us by :five unmistakable divine testimonies. First, by the testimony of the divine life that

WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE 9 He lived, for He lived as never man lived. Let any man take the four Gospels for himself and read them carefully and candidly, he will soon be convinced of two things :-First, that he is reading the story of a life actually lived, that no man could have imagined the character there set forth unless the life had been actually lived, much less could four men have imagined a char acter, each one of the four making his own ac count of that character, not only consistent with itself, but consistent with the other three. To suppose that these four men who wrote the Gos pels imagined the life here set forth would be to suppose a greater miracle than any recorded in the Gospels. He will see, in the second place, that the life here set forth is apart from all other human lives, that it stands by itself, that it is manifestly a divine life lived under human con ditions. Napoleon Bonaparte was a good judge of men. He once said regarding the life 0£ Jesus as recorded in the Gospels, which he had been reading, "I know men [and if he did not know men, who ever did?], and Jesus Christ was not a man." What he meant was, of course, that Jesus Christ was not a mere man. Second, Jesus Christ is accredited to us by the divine words that He spoke. If anyone will study the teaching of Jesus Christ with candor and faithfulness, he v.rill soon see that it has a character that distinguishes it from all other teaching ever uttered on earth.

TALKS TO MEN Third, Jesus Christ was accredited to us by the divine works that He wrought, not only healing the sick, which many others have clone, but cleansing the leper, opening the eyes of the blind, raising the dead, stilling the tempest by a word, turning water into wine, and feeding 5000 with five small loaves and two small fishes, 'o/hich was a creative act. These miracles of power are clear credentials of a God-sent Teacher. We cannot study them candidly and not come to the same conclusion as Nicodemus did, "We know that Thou art a Teacher come from God, for no man can do these signs that Thou doest, except God be with him." Of course, we bear in mind the fact that strenuous efforts have been made to eliminate the supernatural element from the story of the life of Jesus Christ, but all these efforts have resulted in failure, and all similar efforts must result in failure. The most able effort of this kind that was ever made was that of David Strauss in his " Leben J esu.'' David Strauss was a man of remarkable ability and gifts, a man of real and profound scholarship, a man of notable genius, a man of singular power of critical analysis, a man of indomitable perseverance and untiring industry. He brought to bear all the rare gifts of His richly endowed mind upon the story of the life of Jesus with the determination to discredit the miraculous element therein contained. He spent his best years and strength in this effort. If anyone

WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE 11 could have succeeded in such an effort, David Strauss was the man, but he failed utterµ,. For a time it seemed to many that he had succeeded in his purpose, but when his life of Jesus was itself submitted to rigid, critical analysis it fell all to pieces, and to-day is utterly discredited, and those who wish to eliminate the miraculous element in the story of Jesus feel that they must make the attempt anew, since the attempt of David Strauss has come to nothing. Where David Strauss failed, Ernest Renan tried again. He had not, by any means, the ability and genius of Strauss, but he was a man of brilliant genius, of subtle imagination, of rare literary skill, of singular adroitness and finesse. His " Life of Christ " was read with interest and admiration by many. The work was done with fascinating skill. Some fancied that Ernest Renan had suc ceeded in his attempt, but his " Life of Jesus " naturally enough was discredited even in a shorter time than that of David Strauss. All other attempts have met with a similar fate. It is an attempt at the impossible. Let any candid man take the life of Jesus and read it for him self with attention and care, and he will soon discover that the life there pictured could not have been imagined, but must have been really lived ; that the teachings reported as uttered by Jesus are no :fictitious ·teachings put into the mouth of a fictitious person, but the real utter ances of a real person. He will also discover

TALKS TO J\.IEN that the character and the teaching set forth in the Gospels are inextricably interwoven with the stories of the miracles. He will find that if you eliminate the miracles, the character and the teaching disappear, that the character and the teachings cannot• be separated from the mirac ulous element without a violence of treatment that no reasonable man will permit. To-day this much at least is proven, that Jesus lived and wrought substantially as is reconled in the four Gospel records of His life. Personally, I be lieve that more than this is proven, but this is enough for our present purpose. If Jesus lived and wrought substantially as the Gospels record, cleansing the lepers, opening the eyes of the blind, raising the dead, stilling the tempest with His word, feeding the 5000 with the five small loaves and the two small fishes, then He bears unmistakable credentials as a Teacher sent and indorsed by God. Fourth, Jesus Christ is also accredited to us in the fourth place by His divine influence upon all subsequent history. Jesus Christ was be yond peradventure one of three things: He was either the son of God in a unique sense,-a divine Person incarnate in human form,-or else He was the most daring impostor that ever lived, or else one of the most hopeless lunatics. That He claimed to be the Son of God in a unique sense, and that all men should honor Him even as they honored the Father (John v. 23), and that He

WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE 13 and the Father were one (John x...30), and he that had seen Him had seen the Father (John xiv. 9), of this there can be no honest doubt. He was then either the divine Person that He claimed to be, or the most daring impostor, or a most hopeless lunatic. Was His influence upon subsequent history the influence of a lunatic? No one but a lunatic would say so. Was His influence upon subsequent history the influence of an impostor? No one but one whose own heart was thoroughly cankered with deceit and fraud would think of saying so. Not an impostor, not a lunatic, we have only one alternative left-He was what He claimed to be, the Son of God. Fifth, Jesus Christ is accredited to us by His resurrection from the dead. Later on I shall present to you the evidence for the resurrection of Jesus Christ. We will see the historic evi dence for the resurrection of Christ is absolutely convincing in its character, that the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead is one of the best proven facts of history. But the resurrection of Christ is God's seal to Christ's claim. Jesus Christ claimed to be the Son of God. He was put to death for making that claim. Before be ing put to death He said that God would set ~is seal to the claim by raising Him from the dead. They killed Him; they laid Him in the sepulcher; they rolled a stone to the door of the sepulcher; they sealed that door with the Roman seal, which

14 TALKS TO MEN to break was death; and when the appointed hour of which Christ had spoken came, the breath of God swept through the sleeping clay, and Jesus rose triumphant over death, and God spoke more clearly than if He should speak from the open heavens to-day and say, "This is My beloved Son. Hear ye Him." We must then, if we are honest, accept the authority of Jesus Christ; but, as already seen, if we accept the authority of Jesus Christ, we must accept the entire Old Testament and the entire New Testament as being the Word of God; therefo-re I believe the Bible to be the Word of God because of the testimony of Jesus Christ to that eff ec.t. A school of criticism has arisen that assumes to set up its authority against the authority of Jesus Christ. They say, for example, "Jesus says that the uoth Psalm was by David, and was Messianic; but we say that the uoth Psalm is neither by David, nor is it Messianic." They ask us to give up the authority and infallibility of Jesus Christ and the Bible, and accept their authority and their infallibility in their place. Very well, but before doing it we demand their credentials. We do not yield to the claim of authority and infallibility of anyone until he presents his credentials. Jesus Christ presents His credentials. First of all, He presents the credential of the divine life that He lived. What have they to place in comparison with that? We

WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE lo hear much about the beauty of the life of some of this school of critics. We have no desire to deny the claim, but against the beauty of their lives we put the life of Jesus. Which suffers by the com parison? If there is any force in the argument, " If a man's life is in the right, his doctrine can not be in the wrong "-and there is force in the argument-it bears immeasurably more for the authority of Jesus Christ than it does for the authority of any critic or school of critics. Second, Jesus presents the credential of the divine words that He spoke. What have they to put up against that? The words of Jesus Christ have stood the test of eighteen centuries, and shine out with greater luster and glory to-day than ever. What school of criticism has ever stood the test of eighteen years? If one has to choose between the teaching of Christ and that of any school of criticism, it will not take any thoroughly sane man long to choose. Third, Jesus Christ presents His third creden tial, the divine works that He wrought, the un mistakable seal of God upon His claims. What has this school of criticism to put up against that? Absolutely nothing. · It has no miracles but miracles of literary ingenuity in the attempt to make the preposterous appear historical. Fourth, Jesus Christ presents the credential of His influence upon human history. We all know what the influence of Jesus Christ has been, how benign and how divine. Everything

TALKS TO MEN that is best in modern civilization, everything that is best in national, domestic, and individual life, is due to the influence of Jesus Christ. Alas I we also know the influence of this school of criticism. Vl e know that it is weakening the power of ministers and Christian workers every where. We know that it is emptying churches. \Ve know that it is depleting missionary treas uries. We know that it is paralyzing missionary effort in every field where it has gone. I know this by personal observation, and not by hearsay. This may not be their intention. With some of them it is not their intention, but none the less it is a fact. The influence of Jesus has been thoroughly beneficent. The influence of this school of criticism is utterly bad. Fifth, Jesus presents His fifth credential, His resurrection from the dead. What has tbis school of criticism to set up over against that? Nothing whatever. Jesus Christ estab lishes His claim. The opposing school of criti cism stands dumb. Therefore we refuse to bow to the assumed and unsubstantiated authority and infallibility of any school of criticism, of any priest, or pope, or theological professor, but most gladly do we bow to the authority and infallibility of Jesus Christ, so completely proven, and upon His authority accept the entire Old Testament and the entire New Testament as the Word of God.

SECOND TALK

TWO MORE REASONS WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE TO BE THE WORD OF GOD IN the address of yesterday, we saw that if we accepted the authority of Jesus Christ we must accept the entire Old Testament aod the entire New Testament, because He set the stamp of His authority on both; that it was either Christ and the whole Bible, or no Bible and no Christ. We saw, in the second place, that we must ac cept the authority of Jesus Christ because He was accredited to us by five unmistakably divine testimonies. First, the testimony of the divine life that he lived. Second, the testimony of the divine words that he spoke. Third, the testi mony of the divine works that He wrought. Fourth, the testimony of His divine influence upon all subsequent history. Fifth, the testi mony of His resurrection from the dead. We saw, in the next place, that there was a school of criticism that assumed to set its au thority up against that of Jes11s Christ, that this school of criticism demanded that we should give up the infallibility of Christ and the Scriptures, and accept in the place of them the infallibility of this school of criticism. Before yielding to 1'1

18 TALKS TO MEN their demand, we demanded their credentials. We saw that Jesus presented His credentials, which were convincing, but that this school of criticism had absolutely no credentials to present over against those of Jesus Christ. Therefore we refused to bow to their claim of authority and infallibility, but most gladly bowed to the fully proven authority and infallibility of Jesus Christ. My second reason for believing the Bible to be the Word of God is because of its fulfilled prophecies. The average infidel knows abso lutely nothing about fulfilled prophecy, and this is not to be wondered at, for the average Chris tian knows nothing about fulfilled prophecy, and even the average preacher knows practically nothing about fulfilled prophecy. The sub ject of prophecy is a large one, and to go into it thoroughly would take many days, but it tan be presented in outline in a few moments with sufficient fullness to show the overwhelm ing weight of the argument. There are in the iBible two kinds of prophecy: first, the explicit ;verbal prophecies, and second, the prophecies of the types and symbols. We will take up first the explicit verbal proph ~cies. These are of three kinds; first, prophe cies regarding the corning Messiah ; second, prophecies regarding the Jewish people ; third, prophecies regarding the Gentile nations. We will limit ourselves this morning to prophecies

WHY I BELIE'VE THE BIBLE 19 regarding the coming .Messiah, and take only five of them by way of illustration. Isaiah liii. (the entire chapter) ; Micah v. 2; Daniel ix. 25-27; Jeremiah xxiii. 5, 6; Psalms xvi. 8-u. In the passages cited we have predictions of a coming King of Israel. We are told the exact time of His manifestation to His people, the exact place of His birth, the family of which He should be born, the condition of the family at the time of His birth (a condition entirely differ ent from that existing at the time the prophecy was written, and contrary to all the probabilities in the case), the manner of His reception by His people ( a reception entirely different from that which would naturally be expected), the fact, method, and details regarding His death, with the specific circumstances regarding His burial, His resurrection subsequent to His burial, and His victory subsequent to His resurrection. These predictions were fulfilled with the most minute precision in Jesus of Nazareth. An attempt has been made by the rationalists to show that Isaiah liii. does not refer to the coming Messiah. It is natural that they should attempt this, for if it does refer to the corning Messiah, the case of the rationalists is hopeless. That it does refer to the coming Messiah is evi dent from the fact that this chapter was taken to be Messianic by the Jews themselves until its fulfillment in Jesus of Nazareth, and their un willingness to accept Him as the Messiah drove

TALKS TO MEN them into the attempt to show that it was not Messianic. Furthermore, the desperate straits to which those who deny its Messianic applica tion are driven show the hopelessness of their case. When asked who the suffering One of Isaiah liii. is, if He is not the Messiah, the best answer they can get is that it refers to suffering Israel; but anyone who will carefully read the passage will see that this interpretation is im possible. The sufferer of Isaiah liii. is repre sented as suffering for the sins of others than Himself, and those for whom He is suffering are represented as "My people," that is, Israel (verse 8). Now, if the sufferer is suffering for sins of others than Himself, and the others than Himself for whom He is suffering are Israel, then surely the sufferer Himself cannot be Israel. You can bring the prophecies citied down to the very latest date to which the most daring destructive critic ever thought of assigning them, and still they are hundreds of years before the birth of Jesus of Nazareth. How are we going to account for it, that this Book has the power of looking into the future hundreds of years and predicting with most minute precision things to come to pass then, and that these predictions are fulfilled to the very letter? Facts demanding accounting for. You are business men-theolo gians may weave their theories out of their own inner consciousness without regard to facts, but

WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE fll business men must face facts, and here are facts. There is but one rational explanation of it. Any book that has the power of looking hundreds of years into the future, and predicting with minute precision as to person, place, time, circumstances, detailed things to occur at that remote period, must have for its author the only person in the universe who knows the end from the beginning -that is God. Of course, it is quite possible for a far-seeing man to look a few years into the future, and, by studying causes now operant, predict in a general way some things that will occur. But this is not at all our problem with the Bible. It is not a few years into the future, but hundreds of years into the future ; not in a general way, but with minute and specific full ness. It is not of things the causes of which are now operant and discernible, but things the causes of which are not discernible at the present time, and these predictions fulfilled to the letter. To a mind willing to bow to facts and their necessary meaning, it is conclusive evidence of the Divine origin of the Book. A noteworthy fact regarding the prophecies of the Bible is that oftentimes there are two seem ingly contradictory lines of prophecy, and it seems as though if the one line of prophecy were fulfilled, the other could not be ; and yet these two seemingly contradictory lines of prophecy will converge and be fulfilled in one Person. For example, in the Old Testament we have two

TALKS TO MEN lines of prophecy concerning the Messiah ; one line predicts a suffering Messiah, " despised and rejected of men,'' "a man of sorrows and ac quainted with grief." whose earthly mission should end in death and ignominy. The other line of prophecy predicts with equal clearness and definiteness an all-conquering Messiah, who should rule the nations with a rod of iron. How can both of these lines of prophecy be true? The best answer the ancient Jew had, before the ful fillment of both lines in Christ, was that there were to be two Messiahs, one a suffering Mes siah of the tribe of Joseph, and one a con quering Messiah of the tribe of Judah ; but in the actual fulfillment both lines of prophecy meet in the one Person, Jesus of Nazareth, who at His first coming is the suffering Messiah, making atonement for sin by His death upon the cross, as so often predicted in the Old Testament, and at His second coming He will come as a con quering King to rule the nations. But the prophecies of the types and symbols are even more conclusive than the explicit verbal prophecies. If you ask the ordinary, superficial student of the Bible, how much of the Old Testa ment is prophetical, he will reply something like this, " Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, and the Minor Prophets are prophetical," an'1 may add that there are also prophetical passages here and there in the Psalms and Pentateuch. But if you ask a thorough-going student of the Bible

WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE 23 how much of the Old Testament is prophetical, he will tell you that the entire book is propheti cal, that its history is prophetical, that its per sonages are prophetical, that its institutions, ceremonies, offerings, and feasts are prophetical. If you are incredulous ( as you have a right to be until you have investigated, but you have no right to remain incredulous unless you do in vestigate), but will take time, he will sit down and take you through the whole Book from the first chapter of Genesis to the last chapter of Malachi, and will show you everywhere unmis takable foresbadowings of things to come. He will show you in the lives of Abraha_m, Isaac, Joseph, David, and Solomon unquestionable foreshadowings of the truth regarding Christ. He will show you in every sacrifice and offering, in every feast, in every institution, in the taber nacle, and in every part of the tabernacle, its outer court, Holy Place and Most Holy Place, brazen altar, golden candlestick, table of shew bread, golden altar of incense, the veil that hung between the Holy Place_ and Most Holy Place, ark of the convenant, in its boards, bars, sockets and tenons, and the very coverings of the taber nacle, the clearest setting forth of every truth about Christ-His Person, His nature, His char acter, His atoning death, His resurrection, His ascension and coming again, and of all the facts of Jewish and Christian history. He will show you every profoundest truth which :was to be

TALKS TO MEN fully revealed in the New Testament prefigured in the types and symbols of the Old Testament. At first, this very likely will seem to you like a mere happy coincidence, but as you go on verse after verse, chapter after chapter, book after book, if you are a fair-minded man, you will at last be overwhelmingly convinced that this was the thought and intention of the real author; and as you see in this ancient history, and in this legislation ordained to meet the immediate needs of the people, the setting forth of all the pro foundest truths of Christian doctrine, and the perfect foreshadowing of all the facts of the his tory of Christ, the Jewish people and the Church, you will be driven to recognize in it tl)e mind and wisdom of God. The modem critical theo ries regarding the construction of Exodus, Le viticus, Numbers, and Deuteronomy go all to pieces when considered in the light of the mean ing of the types of the Old Testament. I have never known a destructive critic that knew any thing to speak of regarding the types. One can not study them thoroughly without being pro foundly convinced that the real author of the Old Testament, back of the human authors, is God. My third reason for believing the Bible to be the Word of God is because of the unity of the Book. This is an old argument, but a good one. The Bible is composed, as I suppose you lmow, of sixty-six parts or books. It is oftentimes said

WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE !!5 that the Bible is not a book, but a library. This is partly true, partly false. It is true the Bible is a library, but at the same time it is the most intensely one book of any book extant. The sixty-six books which compose the Bible were written by at least forty different authors. They were written in three different languages, He brew, Aramaic, and Greek. The period of their composition extends over at least 1500 years. They were written in countries hundreds of miles apart. They were written by men upon every plane of political and social life, from the king upon the throne down to the herd.man and shep herd and fisherman and the petty politician. They display every form of literary structure. In the Bible we find all kinds of poetry, epic poetry, lyric poetry, didactic poetry, erotic poetry -elegy and rhapsody. We find all kinds of prose as well-historic prose, didactic prose, theological treatise, epistle, proverb, parable, allegory, and oration. · In a book so composite, made up of such divergent parts, composed at such remote periods of time, and under such diverse circumstances, what would we naturally expect? Variance and discord, utter lack of unity. In point of fact, what do we find? The most marvellous unity. Every part of the Bible fits every other part of the Bible-one ever increasing, ever-growing thought pervades the whole. The character of this unity is most significant.

TALKS TO MEN It is not a superficial unity, but a profound unity. On the surface, we often find. apparent discrep-, ancy and disagreement, but, as we study, the apparent discrepancy and disagreement disap pear, and the deep underlying unity appears. The more deeply we study, the more complete do we find the unity to be. The unity is also an organic one-that is, it is not the unity of a dead thing, like a stone, but of a living thing, like a plant. In the early books of the Bible we have the germinant thought; as we go on we have the plant, and further on the bud, and then the blossom, and then the ripened fruit. In Revelation we find the ripened fruit of Genesis. How are we to account for it? Herc is an other fact that demands accounting for, and as business men you have to deal with facts, not theories ; realities, and not fine-spun speculations of cloistered theologians, dreaming apart from the substantial realities of life. There is one easy and simple way of accounting for it, and only one rational way of accounting for it at all, and that is, that. back of the forty or more human authors was the One all-governing, aII controlling, all-superintending, all-shaping mind of God. Suppose it were proposed to build in our capi tal city in America, Washington, a temple that should represent the stone products of every State in the Union. The stones were to come

WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE 'l7 from every State in the Union; some from the marble quarries of Marlboro, N. H., others from the granite quarries of Quincy, Mass., some from the brownstone quarries of Mid dletown, Conn., some from the white marble quarries at Rutland, Vt., some from the gray sandstone quarries at Berea, Ohio, some from the porphyry qua.rries below Knoxville, Tenn., and some from the redstone quarries near Hancock, Mich., some from the brownstone quarries at Kasota, Minn., some from the gypsum quarrier. of the Far West; some stones from every Statt- in the Vnion. The stones were to be of all conceivable sizes and shapes-some large, some small, some mediu:11, sorre were to be cubical, some spherical, some cylindrical, son,e conical, some trapezoidal, and some rec tangular parallelopipcdons. Each stone was to he hewn into its final shape al the quarry from which it was taken. Not a stone was to be touched by mallet or chisel after it reache<l its destination. .Finally the stones are at Washing ton, and the builders go to work. As they build, they find that every stone fits into every other stone, and into its place. It is found that there is not one stone too many, or one stone too few, until at last the builders' work is done and there rises before you a temple with its side walls, its buttresses, its naves, its arches, its transepts and its choirs, its roof, its pinnacles, and its dome, perfect in every outline and in every detail, not

TALKS TO MEN one stone too many and not one stone too few, not one stone left over, and no niche or corner where one stone is lacking, and yet every stone hewn into its final shape in the quarry from which it was taken. How would you account for it? There is one very simple way to account for it. and only one to account for it at all, namely, that back of the individual quarrymen was the master architect who planned the whole building from the beginning and gave to each individual quarryman his specifications for the work. Now this is precisely what we find in that temple of eternal truth which we call the Bible, the stones for which were quarried in places remote from one another by hundreds of miles, and at periods of time I 500 years apart; stones of all conceivable sizes and shapes, and yet every stone fitting into its place and fitting every other stone, until when the Book is finishe~ there rises before you this matchless temple of God's truth, perfect in every outline and every detail ; not one stone too many and not one stone too few, and yet every stone cut into its final shape in the quarry from which it was taken. How are you to account for it? There is but one rational way to account for it, and that is, that back of the human hands that wrought was the master-mind of God that thought and gave to each individual workman his specifications for the work. You can't get around it and be honest and fair.

THIRD TALK

FOUR MORE REASONS WHY I BELIEVE THE BIBLE TO BE THE WORD OF GOD I HAVE given you thus far three reasons why I believe the Bible to be the Word of God. First, because of the testimony of Jesus Christ to that effect. We saw that Jesus Christ set the stamp of His authority upon the entire Old Testament and the entire New Testament, and that if we accepted the authority of Jesus Christ we had to accept the entire Bible as of divine origin and authority. Then we saw that we must ac cept the authority of Jesus Christ, for He was accredited to us by five unmistakable divine testimonies. My second reason was because of its fulfilled prophecies. Vile saw that the Bible had the power of looking into the future and predicting with minuteness and exactness things which were to occur hundreds of years ahead, and that these prophecies were fulfilled to the letter, and that a Book which had this power of looking into the future and telling with minute ness, exactness, and precision things that were to come to pass must have for its author the only One in the universe who lmows the end from the beginning-that is God. Our third reason i9

80 TALKS TO MEN for believing the Bible to be the Word of God was because of the unity of the Book. We saw that though the Bible was composed of sixty-six books, written by at least forty human authors, the period of their composition extending over at least 1500 years, and displaying every form of literary structure, that there was one all-per• vading thought and purpose through the entire Book, that every part of the Book fitted into every other part, and that the Bible was the most thoroughly one Book of any book extant, and that the only way of accounting for this undenia ble and remarkable phenomenon was that back of the many human authors was the one all governing, all-controlling, all-superintending, all-shaping mind of God. My °'"urth reason for believing the Bible to be the Word of God is because of the immeasurable superiority of its teachings to those of any other or all other books. It was quite the fashion when I was studying in theological halls to compare the teachings of the Bible with those of ethnic seers and philosophers, with the teachings of Socrates, Plato, Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Epictetus, Isocrates, Seneca, Buddha, Zoroaster, Con fucius, Mencius, and Mohammed. This is get ting to be the fashion again. Anyone who in stitutes such a comparison and puts the Bible in the same class with ,·hese other teachers must be either ignorant of the teachings of the Bible or of the teachings of these ethnic seers at:\d philoso--

Page 1 Page 2 Page 3 Page 4 Page 5 Page 6 Page 7 Page 8 Page 9 Page 10 Page 11 Page 12 Page 13 Page 14 Page 15 Page 16 Page 17 Page 18 Page 19 Page 20 Page 21 Page 22 Page 23 Page 24 Page 25 Page 26 Page 27 Page 28 Page 29 Page 30 Page 31 Page 32 Page 33 Page 34 Page 35 Page 36 Page 37 Page 38 Page 39 Page 40 Page 41 Page 42 Page 43 Page 44 Page 45 Page 46 Page 47 Page 48 Page 49 Page 50 Page 51 Page 52 Page 53 Page 54 Page 55 Page 56 Page 57 Page 58 Page 59 Page 60 Page 61 Page 62 Page 63 Page 64 Page 65 Page 66 Page 67 Page 68 Page 69

Made with FlippingBook flipbook maker