03.11 - The Apostolic Witness to the Inspiration of the New Testament Writings

(11) The Apostolic Witness to the Inspiration of the New Testament Writings. The New Testament writers make no claim to any specific instruction or command to write their Gospels and Epistles, or inspiration for the purpose of writing apart from what was given them for the work of teaching and governing the Church. Nor does it appear that the writers had formed an}- preconceived purpose or definite idea of creating a new order of Scriptures, cither to supplant or to supplement the sacred Scriptures then in use, or that should be added to them, and be received as of equal authority with them, and to be publicly read in the churches for doctrinal teaching and religious instruction and edification. The inspiration imparted for the work of teaching and preaching the gospel availed for all the work of the apostleship, and especially for the work of making known the truths committed to them, both orally and by writing. Those truths which are of the essence of the gospel arc the truths which the Apostles affirm they had received by “ revelation of Jesus Christ,” or by “ revelation from heaven.” They, moreover, speak of those truths as “ the gospel,” “ the gospel of Jesus Christ “; truths they “ were persuaded of,” and assured of “according to the mind of Christ Jesus,” and of “ the Spirit of God.” These truths they moreover describe as “ Scripture,” which, though the word simply means a “writing,” yet it is used of no writings but those contained in the Old and New Testaments. By calling these writings “ Scriptures “ they distinguished them from all other writings as being the writing given by inspiration of God. When, then, Peter calls Paul’s epistles “ Scripture,” he places them on a level with the Law and the Prophets, with the writings the Lord Jesus received and quoted as “ the Word of God,” and which were generally received and acknowledged to be holy and inspired writings.

Whoever studies the New Testament Scriptures must feel that he is dealing with supernatural truths, truths that breathe the breath that comes of inspiration from God. You read the Epistles of Paul and he gives you the idea of being possessed, penetrated, and permeated with the supernatural.

He breathes the breath of Divine inspiration. He may not talk much about it, or about the Divine inspiration of his writings; a few casual references and incidental allusions are all you have, except when he is vindicating his claim and title to be called an Apostle in the presence of gainsayers. But the fact is there, it is everywhere implied, and is present both to his own and the consciousness of his readers. He speaks, but his “ word is not in word only but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,” and in “ much assurance.”

1 When he teaches, it is not in “ the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the spirit teacheth.”

2 “ If I preach the gospel I have nothing to glory of, for necessity is laid upon me.”

3 Hebrews 1:1-14; 1 Corinthians 2:4; 1 Thessalonians 1:6; 1 Corinthians 2:13; 1 Corinthians 9:16. writes to the Church at Corinth “ His letters, they say, are weighty and strong.” The Apostle always and everywhere gives evidence of Divine inspiration; while he always assures his hearers and readers that his message is not one of his own invention, but that in truth it was “ the Word of God.”

It is no objection to the inspiration of the New Testament Scriptures that they consist largely of “ Epistles “ writings of an incidental and occasional character, having their origin in certain exigencies and circumstances, the impress of which is found upon the style of the writing and the character of the teaching set forth. Because of this the teaching and doctrine, while unsystematic and incomplete in form and treatment, arc real and practical, warm and vital, and glow with an inspiration that comes from the heart of the writer and goes direct to the heart of the reader. The teaching and doctrine of the New Testament were not “ elaborated in the stud}-, but struck out in the “storm and stress of actual life.” The practice of letter-writing did not originate with the Apostles, but it was a form of literary composition that lent itself most admirably to their purposes of warning, admonishing, instructing, reproving, and teaching in all wisdom and doctrine.

“When the Apostle Paul began to write,” says Dr. Sanday, “ probably neither he himself nor his readers attached so much importance to his letters as they came to do.” It would seem that some of his early letters were lost, there being allusions in his Epistles to previous letters having been written, while subsequent Epistles witness to the importance and authority his letters acquired, and the way they were treasured and read in the Churches. In the occasion and preservation of these Epistles we see an over ruling Providence co-operating with the Apostles and the Church, almost unconsciously, to fulfil the Divine purposes of Revelation. And while the inspiration of those letters is not put prominently forward as the reason of their preservation and use, yet no one can read the Epistles with out feeling that the authors were conscious of their Divine inspiration; and the Churches to whom the epistles were addressed, and by whom they were treasured and read, were equally conscious of their inspiration. In the Churches to which these Epistles were sent were men of all nationalities, of learning, philosophy, and authority, and the fact that they received these writings as inspired and authoritative is an important witness to their Divine inspiration.

Then when you have the witness of the early Christian Church and of Church leaders, Apostolic Fathers, and Christian Apologists of the first three centuries, who had excellent opportunities of ascertaining the facts, and who give unqualified support to the Divine inspiration of those writings, the testimony is practically unanimous. It is positively avowed in their writings and everywhere assumed in their controversial, didactic, and devotional discourses. Theyrecognised a clear distinction between these and all other sacred writings. And while acknowledging that a measure of inspiration was realised by the Apostolic Fathers and companions of the Apostles, like Barnabas and Clement, they draw a clear distinction between writings Divine and human They held without question the Divine inspiration of the Apostles and the inspiration and authority of their writings. The “Epistles of Clement and Barnabas,” the “ Shepherd of Hermas,” the “ Didache” the “ Diatessaron,” and other early writings, name most of the Gospels and Epistles of the New Testament by the names and titles as we have them, and unitedly testify to their prevalence and power, and the regularity with which they were read in the public assemblies, and the reverence shown them as inspired and authoritative Scriptures. But while New Testament writers, Apostolic and Church Fathers, Christian Apologists of all degrees of authority witness to the prevalence and Divine inspiration of the sacred Scriptures, the) do not define inspiration, or say in what it consists, and what it implies. The fact is admitted, but the nature, the extent and limitations are not full) defined. The prophets who “testified beforehand of the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should follow,” the men who expounded and interpreted the gracious revelations and purposes of God to their fellows, “ wrote and spoke by inspiration from God, and were recognised channels of Divine and infallible truth. But it is not contended that they always spoke and wrote by revelation from God, or were always inspired by the spirit of God to write and speak, and that all the writings of the Old and New Testament are equally inspired, and teach precisely the same infallible truth. And if we would come to any definite theory of Inspiration, and some affirm that we should, the theory must be built on judgment and inference, on the teachings and character of the writings themselves, and not on any recorded testimony either of Prophets, the Lord Jesus, Apostles, or Church Fathers.