336
T H E K I N G ’S B U S I N E S S
June 1924
W b
d*d
■ ■ Q2SE5E5H5fflE55SH5H5H5E5H525H5H5E5SS2S2525S5H5E5H52SE5E5E5E5H5H5HSH5H5E52SHSH53525E5S5H5E525SS3SH5HS2525H5HHS252SH5H5E5H5H5E5H525H5E525HSHSH5ESESHSE5ESH52SHH2S252SE5ii] Inspiration, Prophec^ and Higher Criticism Dr. A. T. P ierson This article w ritten by Dr. P ierson in 1900, is especially significant today in view of the rapidly growing apostasy, H © the following quotation we,: call especial at- “This Bible reading in Isaiah’s predictive proph ecies reveals very clearly th e n atu re of INSPIRA TION under the old covenant. To Isaiah inspira C o n t r i b u t e d A r t i c l e s
th a t the position taken above is un scriptural and untenable for a sound, accurate and Bible-revering teacher. Our p u r pose will be answered if we m ight ask a few questions: 1. t Could any definition of inspiration well be construc ted which should more successfully leave out the super n atu ra l element? Dr. Smith expressly undertakes to show “the n atu re of INSPIRATION under th e old covenant;” and he tells us “it was noth ing more or less th an the pos session of certain strong m oral and religious convictions, which he (Isaiah) fe lt he owed to the communication of th e Spirit of God; and according to which he in terp reted and even dared to foretell the history of his people and the world.” The italics in this case are ours, used to indicate phrases about which our serious doubts arise. 2. We cannot but ask w hether any o th er believer who possesses like “ strong moral and religious convictions,” m ight not sim ila rly / in terp ret and even dare to foretell events? If such :“ constituted inspiration for Isaiah,” what is to prevent any man—who has like “ simple faith ” in, -and “loyalty to ,” these same “ two simple tru th s,” and who has a “wonderful knowledge” of human n atu re and a “ oeaseless vigilance of affairs”— from making prophecies, predicting and controlling history? 3. We cannot bu t ask, again, whether Isaiah may not have been m istaken, when “he felt he owed” the possess ion of these convictions “ to th e communication of the Spirit of God?” and when “he tells us he received from God him self” “two simple tru th s ? ” 4. Allowing th a t “ our study completely dispels the view of inspiration and prediction so long held in the Church,” does it dispel the Bible’s own view of inspiration as given, for example, in 1 P eter 1:10, 11, 12, and 2 P eter 1:21? We quote both passages in full, reversing th eir or der, because the la tte r gives us a Scriptural view of in spiration, and the form er makes clear th a t the prophet himself did not always understand his own predictions: AUTHORIZED VERSION “K n ow in g th is first, th a t no prop h ecy of th e Scripture Is of any p rivate in terp reta tio n . F or th e proph ecy cam e n ot in old tim e by th e w ill o f m an; but h oly m en of God sp ak e a s th ey w ere m oved by th e H o ly G host.” “Of w h ich sa lv a tio n th e prop h ets h ave inquired and searched d ilig en tly , w h o p rop hesied o f th e g ra ce th a t sh ou ld com e u n to you . S earch in g w h at, or w h a t m anner o f tim e th e Spirit o f C hrist w h ich w a s in them did sig n ify , w h en it testified b efore hand th e su fferin g s o f Christ, and th e g lo ry th a t sh ou ld fo l low . U nto w hom it w a s revealed , th a t n o t un to th em selv es, but u n to u s th ey did m in ister the th in g s, w h ich are n ow re ported un to y ou by them th a t have p reached th e g o sp el u n to you w ith th e H o ly G host se n t down from heaven ; w h ich th in g s th e a n g els d esire to lo o k in to .” ROTHERHAM ’S VERSION “T h is first u n d erstan d ing, th a t no prophecy o f scrip tu re be com es se lf-so lv in g ; for n ot by th e w ill o f m an w a s prophecy brou gh t in a t a n y tim e; but a s by th e H o ly Spirit th e y w ere b ein g borne a lo n g , sp a k e h oly m en of God.” “C oncerning wrhich sa lv a tio n p rop h ets so u g h t ou t, and search ed out, th e y w h o con cern in g th e fa v o r for y ou prophe sied: sea rch in g as to w h at, or w h a t m anner of season , th e
tion was nothing more or less th an the possession of cer tain strong moral and religious convictions, which he felt he owed to th e communication of the Spirit of God, and according to which he in terp reted and even dared to foretell the history of his people and the world. “Our study completely dispels, on the evidence of the Bible itself, th a t view of inspiration and prediction, so long held in the Church, which it is difficult to define, bu t which means something like this: th a t the prophet beheld a vision of the fu tu re in its actual detail, and read this off as a man may read the history of the past out of a book or a clear memory. This is a very simple view, bu t too simple eith er to meet the facts of the Bible, or to afford to men any of th a t intellectual and sp iritu al satisfaction which the discovery of the Divine methods is sure to afford. The lit eral view of inspiration is too simple to be tru e and too simple to be edifying. On the other hand how profitable, how edifying, is the Bible’s own account of its inspiration. To know th a t men in terp reted , predicted, and controlled history under power of the purest moral and religious con victions, in the knowledge of, and loyalty to, certain fun dam ental laws of God, is to receive an account of inspira tion which is not only as satisfying to -the reason as it is tru e to the facts of the Bible, but is spiritually very helpful by th e lo fty :example and rew ard it sets before our own faith. By faith, differing in degree, but not in kind, from ours, faith which is th e substance of things hoped for, these men became prophets of God and received the tes timony of history th at they spoke from Him. Isaiah pro phesied and predicted all he did from loyalty to two simple tru th s, which he tells us he received from God Himself: th a t sin must be punished, and th a t the people of God must be saved. This simple faith, acting along w ith a wonderful knowledge of hum an n atu re and a ceaseless vigilance of affairs,.constituted inspiration for Isaiah. “There is thus, w ith great modifications, an analogy be tween the prophet and the scientific observer of the present day. Men of science are able to affirm the certainty of n atu ra l phenomena by th eir knowledge of th e laws and principles of nature. Certain forces being present, certain resu lts must come to pass. The Old Testam ent prophets, working in history, a sphere where the problems were in finitely more complicated by the presence and powerful operation of man’s free will, seized hold of principles as conspicuous and certain to them as the laws of n atu re are to th e scientists, and o u t of th eir conviction of these they proelaimed the necessity of certain events, etc.” The above is a literal, verbatim , and exact quotation from “The Prophecies of Isaiah ,” by Professor George Adam Smith, of Glasgow, Scotland, Yol. 1, pages 372, 373; the capitals and italics being the au th o r’s own. This may therefore be taken as a fair specimen of the ac cepted teaching of the Modern School of Criticism to which Professor Smith belongs, and of which he would be con sidered not only a good representative, but an unusually ac ceptable and “evangelical” representative. We desire here to enter into no argum ent or elaborate attem p t to prove
Made with FlippingBook - Online Brochure Maker