02.12 - The Apostles as Writers

(12) The Apostles as Writers The work of the Apostles was primarily that of witnesses and preachers of the Gospel: as such their inspiration may be supposed to have been that of speakers rather than writers. It was, however, as Apostles as men chosen and commissioned for the office and work of the Apostolate that they were in spired, and therefore fitted and prepared for whatever was included in that office and work. The promises of Christ, moreover, had regard to their work as a whole, and from the commencement to the close of the Apostleship “ alway even unto the end,” and pertain both to the matter and the manner of the teaching, and must, therefore, concern writing as well as preaching. Indeed, some theologians argue that a higher inspiration was needed and guaranteed to the Apostles as writers than as speakers: this, however, cannot be inferred from the statements of the Apostles themselves. The Corinthians said, “ His letters are weighty and strong, but his bodily presence is weak, and his speech of no account,” meaning that the epistles he sent them were more powerful and effective when read and considered by 2 Corinthians 2:12-13 them than his speech and words were when he was with them and addressed them. But this criticism Paul controverts, and affirms that what he is “ by letter when absent, that he will be by word and deed when present with them.” To the Thessalonians he states that his discourses and epistles are of the same authority and importance, while he requires the same obedience to what is communicated, “ whether by word or epistle.” If the written truth were more authoritative and Divine than the spoken utterance, it would be required of us to distinguish between the two, and between what was spoken and communicated by companions or fellow-workers, and what was subscribed by the Apostle’s own hand, and that apart from the nature and contents of the truth itself.

John the Baptist, the greatest of prophets, and the Lord Jesus, the greatest of teachers, wrote nothing at all, and the Accord we have of their teachings and discourses is the report or testimony of eye- and earwitnesses; but no one would dispute the authority of the teachings of the Lord Jesus on that account. The Apostles wrote as they preached, and claimed the same inspiration for their written as for their spoken communications; no more and no less. The inspiration and revelation given them by the Spirit of truth had respect to the truth in its totality, and therefore relates to the contents of the truth, to the method of receiving, apprehending, and developing it; and so must concern both preaching and writing as means for preserving, developing and propagating the truth. The historical and theological development of the truth of revelation is no argument against the inspiration of the Apostles, since the promises of Christ to them recognised theprogressive character of Divine revelation and the fuller developments of truth according to the necessities of the times in which they wrote and spoke. No gift bestowed by the Lord Jesus on His Apostles at the time He sent them forth, and no endowment received at Pentecost, can be said to have exhausted the promises of Christ and the fulness of the Spirit’s might and truth; and so the promises hold good under all developments, and secure to them Divine inspiration and guidance as they passed from stage to stage in the progressive apprehension and communication of the truth. On the other hand, we are not warranted to conclude from this that the latest writings of the New Testament are the most inspired arid authoritative, and the most deserving of confidence and respect: developments are not necessarily new revelations: the truth is present in germ in the earliest revelations, to be more fully developed in course of time. Moreover, the authority of Divine truth is not in the largeness of the view we have of it, nor in the fulness of detail, nor in the intensity and force with which the truth is realised, but in the truth itself, in its being the truth of God, and given to us by revelation from God. The New Testament writings are diverse in character, method, and form of treatment. We have the testimony of witnesses to facts of various kinds, statements of what they saw and heard, of transactions and events in which they took part. We have independent and concurrent witnesses and testimonies, which, differing in detail, agree in fact and substance as to the truth and event itself. We have, moreover, theological and argumentative treatises, with formal and logical arrangements of truth and doctrine. In some instances we sec the writer struggling with the truths and thoughts that possessed him thoughts that seem too Divine for human speech and utterance, too big and vast to be grasped and shaped; yet he struggles to give them birth and form, and to know and declare the “ love that passeth knowledge,” and to make known the “ hidden wisdom,” <l the depth of the riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God,” not in u the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth.” The New Testament writers do not say much of their own inspiration or the inspiration of each other, but what the)do say is assuring. The Apostle Paul makes the greatest claim for himself. This is owing partly to the fact that he was not one of the Twelve chosen and instructed by the Lord Jesus, and companied with Him as the other Apostles did; and partly in vindication of his own apostlcship and inspiration, which was challenged from time to time. The place and influence the Apostle acquired in the ranks of the Apostles and among the Churches, the number, character and doctrinal significance of the Apostle’s writings and teachings are such as to have won for him the acknowledged position as “ the real author of Christianity.” Baur and the Tubingen School of Criticism declared Paul to be “ the chief exponent of evangelicalism and universalism; and that but for him Christianity must have failed of its purpose.” This theory fails to recognise the importance of the teaching of Jesus Christ and of the Eleven; it fails to appreciate the importance of the preaching of Peter and John, and the testimony and labours of Stephen, Barnabas, Timothy, and other of the Evangelists and helpers in the early Church.

Peter was leader and chief spokesman for the Apostles on all important occasions; he also testified of his inspiration and that of his fellow Apostles; while above all other New Testament writers he spoke most positively of the “ theopneustic “ character of the Scriptures, and classed the writings of the Apostles with those of the holy prophets. In his Second Epistle, Peter designates Paul’s Epistles as sacred Scriptures, and testifies to their supreme authority and importance. John says the least about his inspiration of any of the great Apostles, but he uses the words “ye have an unction from the Holy One, and ye know all things”; while in the Apocalypse he speaks of being “ in the Spirit,” of “sayings faithful and true,” and of the authority and completeness of the Word of God. The two historical Evangelists, the unknown author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, James and Jude, cannot claim apostolic inspiration and authority. They were, however, companions of the Apostles; they shared in the inspiration that belonged to the entire community of believers, while Mark and Luke are said to have written their Gospels under the superintendence of the Apostles Peter and Paul. Few writings bear more clearly and fully the marks of Apostolicity than do the Synoptic Gospels, while that of Luke’s witnesses above all others to the universal character of Christ’s teaching. The “ Acts of the Apostles,” by the same author, bears the stamp of genuineness, of historicity and trustworthiness, and of being divinely inspired.

Dr. Pope says: “ The New Testament writers form a body of men united in the unfolding of Christian doctrine, and who always deliver their message as from God their Saviour, by His Holy Spirit. If they do not always assert their inspiration, it is everywhere implied by themselves, and supposed to be understood by their hearers and readers. In this they occupy precisely the same position as the Old Testament writers. Like them, they stand be forethe people of God with infallible teaching, from which there is no appeal; like them, the} occasionally declare themselves when their authority is resisted to be the organs of the Spirit. In a word, they take the place in the New Testament of the prophets in the Old, continuing their office and ministrations by a divine commission, the credentials of which are known and read of all men.”