-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/25778/archive/files/e26de6c522f113d1975ab2358776b9e2.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=k8Gu18hn1CMNdHANJAChgT8lyJxUufLUTczfAOFFLTQyFRLV3r8KBh2bM0MatI8PVHiXmCn3%7EU%7E84mSCQ6pE5p2Yq0ZvsCA%7E29TJw%7EDRrck-YZzKxWfH1TQqnjy0%7EqVEfGYYnNYfK7CXtwu-4OiLSUoOjU-usTQipWqpkGtkqMwJ75WJy1xFtnZTx09ME7RX91Z1jubinZy2fWdgUbt6qm3x5kVvKhk2X1F8oXMpyCDdphfIa85QT0jGPDPB-CN41AyBSzLJnn0M0VwnZZ9IrNiryJ-AFAOWzsGJE1cvw3DP0iJL-wGIbZxMH6eNywBMBc2k2j29swUwBc%7EfD8X2fQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
503719a50d8f36b47102352bdf50b975
PDF Text
Text
ON
INSPIRATION.
PUBLISHED BY THOMAS SCOTT,
NO. 11, THE TERRACE, FARQUHAR ROAD,'
UPPER NORWOOD, LONDON, S.E.
Price Sixpence.
��ON INSPIRATION.
HERE is a certain, amount of difficulty in defining
the word Inspiration: it is used in so many
different, senses by the various schools of religious
thought, that it is almost necessary to know the theo
logical opinions of the speaker before being quite
sure of his meaning when he talks of a book as being
inspired. In the halcyon days of the Church, when
faith was strong and reason weak, when priests had
but to proclaim and laymen but to assent, inspiration
had a distinct and a very definite meaning. An in
spired man spoke the very words of God : the Bible
was perfect from the “ In the beginning ” of Genesis
to the “ Amen ” of Revelation: it was perfect in
science, perfect in history, perfect in doctrine, perfect
in morals. In that diamond no flaw was to be seen ; it
sparkled with a spotless purity, reflecting back in
many-coloured radiance the pure white light of God.
But when the chemistry of modern science came for
ward to test this diamond, a murmuring arose, low at
first, but irrepressible. It was scrutinised through the
microscope of criticism, and cracks and flaws were
discovered in every direction; then, instead of being
enshrined on the altar, encircled by candles, it was
brought out into the searching sunlight, and the naked
eye could see its imperfections. Then it was tested
anew, and some bold men were heard to whisper, “It
is no diamond at all, God formed in ages past; it is
nothing but paste, manufactured by manand the
T
�4
On Inspiration.
news passed from mouth to mouth, until the whisper
swelled into a cry, and many voices echoed, “ This is
no diamond at all.” And so tilings are to-day; the
battle rages still; some maintain their jewel is perfect
as ever, and that the flaws are in the eyes that look at
it; some reluctantly allow that it is imperfect, but still
consider it a diamond; others resolutely assert that,
though valuable for its antiquity and its beauty, it is
really nothing but paste.
To take first the really orthodox theory of inspira
tion, generally styled the “plenary” or “verbal” in
spiration of the Bible. It was well defined centuries
since by Athenagoras; according to him the inspired
writers “ uttered the things that were wrought in
them when the Divine Spirit moved them, the Spirit
using them as a flute-player would blow into the flute.”
The same idea has been uttered in powerful poetry by
a writer of our own day :—
“ Then thro’ the mid complaint of my confession,
Then thro’ the pang and passion of my prayer,
Leaps with a start the shock of His possession,
Thrills me and touches, and the Lord is there.
Scarcely I catch the words of His revealing,
Hardly I hear Him, dimly understand ;
Only the power that is within me pealing,
Lives on my lips and beckons to my hand.”
The idea is exactly the same as that of the pagan
prophetesses : they became literally possessed by a
spirit, who used their lips to declare his own thoughts:
so orthodox Christians believe that it is no longer
Moses or Isaiah or Paul that speaks, but the Spirit of
the Father that speaks in them. This theory is held
by all strictly orthodox believers; this and this only is
from their lips, inspiration ; hard pressed on the sub
ject they will allow that the Spirit inspires all good
thoughts “ in a sense,” but they will be very careful in
declaring that this is only inspiration in a secondary
sense, an inspiration which differs in kind as well as
�On Inspiration.
$
in degree from the inspiration of the writers of the
Bible. By this mechanical theory, so to speak, it is
manifest that all possibility of error is excluded : thus,
when Matthew quotes from the Old Testament an
utterly irrelevant historical reference—“ when Israel
was a child, then I loved him and called my son out of
Egyptf as a prophecy of the alleged flight of Jesus into
Egypt, and his subsequent return from that country
into Palestine, we find Dr. Wordsworth, Right Rever
end Rather in God, and Bishop of Lincoln, gravely
telling us that “ the Holy Spirit here declares what
had been in His own mind when He uttered these
words by Hosea. And who shall venture to say that
he knows the mind of the Spirit better than the Spirit
Himself?” Dr. Pusey again, standing valiantly, after
the manner of the man, to every Church dogma, how
ever it may be against logic, against common sense,
against reason, or against charity, makes a very reason
able inquiry of those who believe in an outward and
supernatural inspiration, and yet object to the term
verbal. “ How,” he asks, “ can thought be conveyed
to a man’s mind except through words?” The learned
doctor’s remark is indeed a very pertinent one, as
addressed to all those who believe in an exterior reve
lation. Thoughts which are communicated from with
out can only become known to man through the
medium of words : even his own thoughts only become
appreciable to him when they are sufficiently distinct
to be clothed in words (of course not necessarily spoken
words) ; and we can only exclude from this rule such
thoughts as may be presented to the mind through men
tal sight or hearing : e.g., music might probably be com
posed mentally by imagining the sounds, qy mechanical
contrivances invented by imagining the objects; but
any argument, any story, which is capable of repro
duction in writing, must be thought out in words. A
moment’s thought renders this obvious; if a man is
arguing with a Frenchman in his own language, he
�6
On Inspiration.
must, to render his arguments clear and powerful,
think in French. Now, if the Bible be inspired so as
to insure accuracy, how can this be done except
through words; for many of the facts recorded must,
from the necessity of the case, have been unknown to
the writers. Suppose for a moment that the Biblical
account of the creation of the world were true, no man
in that case could possibly have thought it out for him
self. Only two theories can reasonably be held regard
ing this record: one, that it is true, which implies
necessarily that it is literally true and verbally inspired,
since the knowledge could only have come from the
Creator, and, being communicated must have come in the
form of words, which words being God’s, must be literally
true; the other, that it ranks with othei- ancient cosmo
gonies, and is simply the thought of some old writer,
giving his idea as to the origin of the world around
him. I select the account of the creation as a crucial
test of the verbal theory of inspiration, because any
other account in the Bible that I can think of has a
human actor in it, and it might be maintained—how
ever unlikely the hypothesis—that a report was related
or written down by one who had been present at the
incident reported, and the inspiration of the final
writer may be said to consist in re-writing the previous
record which he may be directed to incorporate in his own
work. But no one witnessed the creation of the world,
save the Creator, or, at the most, He and His angels,
and the account given of it must, if true, be word for
word divine ; or, if false—as it is—must be nothing
more than human fancy. We must push this argu
ment one step further. If the account was communi
cated only to the man’s mind, in words rising inter
nally to the inward ear alone, how could the man
distinguish between these divine thoughts rising in his
mind, and his own human thoughts rising in exactly
the same manner. Thoughts rise in our minds, we
know not how; we only become conscious of them
�On Inspiration.
7
when, they are there, and, as far as we can judge, they
are produced quite naturally according to certain laws.
But how is it possible for us to distinguish whence
these thoughts cornel There they are, ours, not
another’s, ours as the child is the father’s and mother’s,
the product of their own beings. If my thought is not
mine, but God’s, how am I to know this? it is pro
duced within me as my own, and the source of one
thought is not distinguishable from that of another.
Thus, those who believe in the accuracy of the Bible
are step by step driven to allow that not only are
words necessary, but spoken words; if the Bible be
supernaturally inspired at all, then must God have
spoken not only in human words but also in human
voice; if the Bible be supernaturally inspired at all,
it must be verbally inspired, and be literally accurate
about every subject on which it treats.
Unfortunately for the maintainers of verbal inspira
tion, their theory is splendidly adapted for being
brought before the bar of inexorable fact. It is worth
while to remark, in passing, that the infallibility of the
Bible has only remained unchallenged where ignorance
has reigned supreme; as soon as men began to read
history and to study nature, they also began to ques
tion scriptural accuracy, and to defy scriptural author
ity. Infallibility can only live in twilight; so far,
every infallibility has fallen before advancing know
ledge, save only the infallibility of Nature, which is
the infallibility of God Himself. Protestants consider
Roman Catholics fools, in that they are not able to see
that the Pope cannot be infallible, because one Pope
has cursed what another Pope has blessed. They can
see in the case of others that contradiction destroys
infallibility, but they cannot see the force of the same
argument when applied to their own pope, the Bible.
Strong in their “ invincible ignorance,” they bring us
a divinely-inspired book ; “ good,” we answer; “ then
is your book absolutely true, and it will square with all
�8
On Inspiration.
known truth in science and history, and will, of course,
never be self-contradictory.”
The first important
question which arises in our minds as we open so
instructive a book as a revelation from on high, refers
naturally to the Great Inspirer. The Bible contains,
as might indeed be reasonably expected, many state
ments as to the nature of God, and we inquire of it,
in the first place, the character of its Author. May
we hope to see Him in this world 1 “ Yes,” answers
Exodus. “ Moses in days gone by spoke to God face to
face, and seventy-four Israelites saw Him, and eat and
drank in His presence.” We have scarcely taken in
this answer when we hear the same voice proceed :
“ No; for God said, thou canst not see my face, for
there shall no man see me and live; while John
declares that no man has seen Him, and Paul, that
man neither hath nor can see Him.” Is He Almighty ?
“ Yes,” says Jesus. “With God all things are pos
sible.” “ No,” retorts Judges ; “ for He could not
drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they
had chariots of iron.” Is He just ? “ Yes,” answers
Ezekiel. “ The son shall not bear the iniquity of the
father; the soul that sinneth it shall die.” “ No,”
says Exodus. “ The Lord declares that He visits the
iniquity of the fathers upon the children.” Is He
impartial ? “ Yes,” answers Peter.
“ God is no
respecter of persons.” “No;” says Romans, “for
God loved Jacob and hated Esau before they were
born, that His purpose of election might stand.” Is
He truthful 1 “ Yes ; it is impossible for God to lie,”
says Hebrews. “ No,” says God of Himself, in
Ezekiel. “ I, the Lord, have deceived that prophet.”
Is He loving? “Yes,” sings the Psalmist. “ He is
loving unto every man, and His tender mercy is
over all His works.”
“ No,” growls Jeremiah.
“ He will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy on
them.” Is he easily pacified when offended ? “ Yes,”
says the Psalmist. “ His wrath endureth but the
�On Inspiration.
g
twinkling of an eye.” “ No,” says Jeremiah. “ Ye
have kindled a fire in His anger that shall burn for
ever.” Unable to discover* anything reliable about
God, doubtful whether He be just or unjust, partial or
impartial, true or false, loving or fierce, placable or
implacable, we come to the conclusion that at all
events we had better be friends with Him, and surely
the book which reveals His will to us will at least
tell us in what way He desires us to approach Him.
Does He accept sacrifice ? “Yes,” says Genesis, “Noah
sacrificed and God smelled a sweet savour,” and Samuel
tells us how God was prevailed on to take away a
famine by the sacrifice of seven men, hanged up before
the Lord. In our fear we long to escape from Him
altogether, and ask if this be possible ? “ Yes,” says
Genesis. “ Adam and his wife hid from Him in the
trees, and He had to go down from His heaven to see
if some evil deeds were rightly reported to Him.”
“No,” says Solomon. “ You cannot hide from Him,
for His eyes are in every place.” So we throw up in
despair all hope of finding out anything reliable
about Him, and proceed to search for some trustworthy
history. We try to find out how man was made.
One account tells us that he was made male and female,
even in the image of God Himself; another that God
made man alone, and subsequently formed a woman
for him out of one of his own ribs. Then we find in
one chapter that the beasts were all made, and lastly,
that God made “ His masterpiece, man.” In another
chapter we are told that God having made man
thought it not good to leave him by himself, and
proceeded to make every beast and fowl, saying that He
would make Adam a help-meet for him ; on bringing
them to Adam, however, none was found worthy to
mate with him, so woman was tried as a last experi
ment. As we read on we find evident marks of
confusion; double, or even treble, accounts of the
same incident, as, for instance, the denving a wife
“ a2
�io
On Inspiration.
and its consequences. Then we see Moses fearing
Pharaoh’s wrath, and flying out of Egypt to avoid
the king’s wrath, and not venturing to return until
after his death, and are therefore surprised to learn
from Hebrews that he forsook Egypt by faith, not
fea/ring the wrath of the king. Then we come across
numberless contradictions in Kings and Chronicles, in
prophecy and history, Ezekiel prophecies that Nebu
chadnezzar shall conquer Tyrus, and destroy it and
take all its riches, and a few chapters afterwards it is
recorded that he did accordingly attack Tyrus but
failed, and that as he got no wages for this attack he
should have Egypt to make up for his failure. In the
New Testament the contradictions are endless; Joseph,
the husband of Mary, had two fathers, Jacob and
Heli ; Salah is in the same predicament, for although
the son of Cainan, Arphaxad begat him. When John
was cast into prison Jesus began to preach, although
He had been preaching and gaining disciples while
John was still at large. Jesus sent the Twelve to
preach, telling them to take a staff, and yet bidding
them to take none. He eat the Passover with His
disciples, although He was crucified before that feast.
He had one title on His cross, but it is verbally inspired
in four different ways. He rose with many variations of
date and time, and ascended the same evening, although
He subsequently went into Galilee and remained on
earth for forty days. He sent word to His disciples to
meet Him in Galilee, and yet suddenly appeared among
them as they sat quietly together the same evening at
Jerusalem. Stephen’s history contradicts our Old
Testament. When Paul is converted his companions
hear a voice, although another account says that they
heard none at all. After his conversion he goes in
and out at Jerusalem with the Apostles, although,
strangely enough, he sees none of them except Peter
and James. But one might spend pages in noting
these inconsistencies, while even one of them destroys
�On Inspiration.
11
the verbal inspiration theory. From these contradic
tions I maintain that one of two things must follow,
either the Bible is not an inspired book, or else
inspiration is consistent with much error, as I shall
presently show.
I am quite ready to allow that the Bible is inspired,
and I therefore lay do wn as my first canon of inspira
tion, that:
“ Inspiration does not prevent inaccuracy.”
I turn to the second class of orthodox inspirationists,
who, while allowing that verbal inspiration is proved
impossible by many trivial inconsistencies, yet affirm
that God’s overruling power ensures substantial accu
racy, and that its history and science are perfectly
true and are to be relied on. To test this assertion,
we—after noting that Bible history is, as has been
remarked above, continually self-contradictory—turn
to other histories and compare the Bible with them.
We notice first that many important Biblical occur
rences are quite ignored by “ profane ” historians.
We are surprised to see that while the Babylonish
captivity left marks on Israel which are plainly seen,
Egypt left no trace on Israel’s names or customs, and
Israel no trace on Egypt’s monuments. The doctrine
of angels comes not from heaven, but slips into Jewish
theology from the Persian; while immortality is
brought to light neither by Hebrew prophet nor by
the gospel of Jesus, but by the people among whom
the Jews resided during the Babylonish captivity.
The Jewish Scriptures which precede the captivity
know of nothing beyond the grave, the Jewish
Scriptures after the captivity are radiant with the
light of a life to come; to these Jesus adds nothing of
joy or hope. The very central doctrine of Christianity
—the Godhead of Jesus—is nothing but a repetition
of an idea of Greek philosophy borrowed by early
Christian writers, and is to be found in Plato and
Philo as clearly as in the fourth Gospel. Science con
�12
On Inspiration.
tradicts the Bible as much as does history j geology
laughs at its puny periods of creation astronomy
destroys its heavens, and asks why this little world
took a week in making, while the sun and moon and
the countless stars were rapidly turned out in twelve
hours natural history wonders why the kangaroos did
not stay in Asia after the deluge instead of undertaking
the long sea voyage to far Australia, and enquires how
the Mexicans, and Peruvians, and others, crossed the
wide ocean to settle in America; archeeology presents
its human bones from ancient caves, and asks how they
got there if only six thousand years have passed since
Adam and Eve stood alone in Eden, gazing out on the
unpeopled earth : the pyramids point at the negro
type distinct and clear, and ask how it comes that it
was. so rapidly developed at first, and yet has remained
stationary ever since. At last science gets weary of
slaying a foe so puny, and goes on its way with a smile
on its grand still face, leaving the Bible to teach its
science to whom it lists. Evidence so weighty crushes
all life out of this second theory of inspiration, and
gives us a second rule to guide us in our search :
“Inspiration does not prevent ignorance and error.”
We may pass on to the third class of inspirationists,
those who believe that the Bible is not given to man
to teach him either history or science, but only to
reveal to him what he could not discover by the use
of his natural faculties—e.g., the duties of morality
and the nature of God. I must note here the subtilty
of this retreat. Driven by inexorable fact to allow the
Bible to be fallible in everything in which we can test
its assertions, they, by a clever strategic movement,
remove their defence to a post more difficult to attack.
They maintain that the Bible is infallible in points
where no cannonade of facts can be brought to bear
on it. What is this but to say, that although we can
prove the Bible to be fallible on every point capable
of proof, we are still blindly to believe it to be infallible
�On Inspiration.
where demonstrated error is, from the nature of the
case, impossible ? As regards the nature of God, we
have already seen that the Bible ascribes to Him virtue
and vice indifferently. We turn to morality, and here
our first great difficulty meets us, for when we point
to a thing and say, “that is profoundly immoral,” our
opponents retort, “it is perfectly moral.” Only the
progress of humanity can prove which of us is in the
right, though here, too, we have one great fact on our
side, and that is, thp conscience in man; already men
would rather die than imitate the actions of Old Testa
ment saints who did that which was “right in the eyes
of Jehovah and presently they will be bold enough
to reject in words that which they already reject in
deeds. Few would put the Bible freely into the hands of
a child, any more than they would give freely to the
young the unpurged editions of Swift and Sterne; and
I imagine that the most pious parents would scarcely
see with unmingled pleasure their son and daughter of
fifteen and sixteen studying together the histories and
laws of the Pentateuch. But taking the Bible as a
rule of life, are we to copy its saints and its laws ?
For instance, is it right for a man to marry his halfsister, as did the great ancestor of the Jews, Abraham,
the friend of God ? a union, by the way, which is for
bidden by Jewish law, although said to be the source
of their race. Is the lie of the Egyptian midwives
right, because Jehovah blessed them for it, even as
Jael is pronounced blessed by Deborah, the prophetess,
for her accursed treachery and murder ? Is the robbery
of the Egyptians right, because commanded by Jehovah?
Are the old cruel laws of witchcraft right, because
Jehovah doomed the witch to death? Are the ordeals
of the middle ages right, because derived from the laws
of Jehovah ? Is human sacrifice right, because attempted
by Abraham, enjoined by Moses, practised by Jephthah,
efficacious in turning away God’s wrath when Saul’s
seven sons were offered up ? Is murder right because
�14
On Inspiration.
Phineas wrought atonement by it, and Moses sent his
murderers throughout the camp to stay God’s anger
by slaying their brethren ? Is it right that the persons
of women captives should be the prey of the conquerors,
because the Jews were commanded by Jehovah to save
alive the virgins and keep them for themselves, except
the sixty-four reserved for Himself? Is the man after
God’s own heart a worthy model for imitation? Are
Jehu’s lying and slaughter right because right in the
eyes of Jehovah ? Is Hosea’s marriage commendable,
because commanded by Jehovah, or are the signs of
Jeremiah and Ezekiel the less childish and indecent
because they are prefaced with, “thus saith Jehovah?”
Far be it from me to detract from the glorious morality
of portions of the Bible; but if the whole book be in
spired and infallible in its moral teaching, then, of
course, one moral lesson is as important as another,
and we have no right to pick and choose where the
whole is divine. The harsher part of the Old Testa
ment morality has burnt its mark into the world, and
may be traced through history by the groans of suffer
ing men and women, by burning witches and tortured
enemies of the Lord, by flaming cities and blood-stained
fields. If murder and rapine, treachery and lies,
robbery and violence, were commanded long ago by
Almighty God; if things are right and wrong only by
virtue of His command, then who can say that they
may not be right once more, when used in the cause
of the Church, and how are we to know that Moses
speaks in God’s name when he commands them, and
Torquemada only in his own? But even Christians
are beginning to feel ashamed of some of the exploits
of the “ Old Testament Saints,” and to try and explain
away some of the harsher features; we even hear
sometimes a wicked whisper about “ imperfect light,”
&c. Good heavens 1 what blasphemy ! Imperfect light
can mean nothing less than imperfect God, if He is
responsible for the morality of these writings.
�On Inspiration.
'
15
So, from our study of the Bible we deduce another
canon by which we may judge of inspiration :
“ Inspiration does not prevent moral error.”
There is a fourth class of inspirationists, the last
which clings to the skirts of orthodoxy, which is
always endeavouring to plant one foot on the rocks of
science, while it balances the other over the quick
sands of orthodox supernaturalism. The Broad Church
school here takes one wide step away from orthodoxy,
by allowing that the inspiration of the Bible differs
only in degree and not in kind from the inspiration
common to all mankind. They recognise the great
fact that the inspiring Spirit of God is the source
whence flow all good and noble deeds, and they point
out that the Bible itself refers all good and all know
ledge to that one Spirit, and that He breathes
mechanical skill into Bezaleel and Aholiab, strength
into Samson’s arms, wisdom into Solomon, as much as
He breathes the ecstacy of the prophet into Isaiah,
faith into Paul, and love into John. They recognise
the old legends as authentic, but would maintain as
stoutly that He spoke to Newton through the falling
of an apple, as that He spoke of old to Elijah by fire,
or to the wise men by a star. This school try and
remove the moral difficulties of the Old Testament by
regarding the history recorded in it as a history which
is specially intended to unveil the working of God
through all history, and so to gradually reveal God as
He makes Himself known to the world; thus the
grosser parts are regarded as wholly attributable to
the ignorance of men, and they delight to see the
divine light breaking slowly through the thick clouds
of human error and prejudice, and to trace in the
Bible the gradual evolution of a nobler faith and a
purer morality. They regard the miracles of Jesus as
a manifestation that God underlies Nature and works
ever therein : they believe God to be specially mani
fested in Jewish history, in order that men may under-
�16
On Inspiration.
stand that He presides ovei* all nations and rules over
all peoples. To Maurice the Bible is the explainer of
all earth’s problems, the unveiler of God, the Bread of
Life. There is, on the whole, little to object to in the
Broad Church view of inspiration, although liberal
thinkers regret that, as a party, they stop half way,
and are still trammelled by the half-broken chains of
orthodoxy. For instance, they usually regard the
direct revelation of morality as closed by Jesus and His
immediate followers, although they allow that God has
not deserted His world, nor confined His inspiration
within the covers of a book. To them, however, the
Bible is still the, inspired book, standing apart by
itself, differing from all other sacred books. From
their view of inspiration, which contains so much that
is true, we deduce a fourth rule :
“ Inspiration is not confined to written words about
God.”
From a criticism of the book, which is held by
orthodox Christians, to be specially inspired, we have
then gained some idea of what inspiration does not
do. It does not prevent inaccuracy, ignorance, error,
nor is it confined to any written book. Inspiration,
then, cannot be an overwhelming influence, crushing
the human faculties and bearing along the subject of
it on a flood which he can neither direct nor resist.
It is a breathing—gentle and gradual—of pure
thoughts into impure hearts, tender thoughts into
fierce hearts, forgiving thoughts into revengeful hearts.
David calls home his banished son, and he learns that,
“ even as a father pitieth his children, so is the Lord
merciful unto them that fear Him.” Paul wishes
himself accursed if it may save his brethren, and from
his own self-sacrificing love he learns that “ God will
have all men to be saved, and to come to the know
ledge of the truth.” Thus inspiration is breathed into
the man’s heart. “ I love and forgive, weak as I am;
what must be the depth, of the love and forgiveness of
�On Inspiration.
17
God?” David’s fierce revenge finds an echo in his
writings; for man writes, and not God : he defaces
God by ascribing to Him the passions surging only in
his own burning Eastern heart: then, as the Spirit
moves him to forgiveness, his song is of mercy; for he
feels that his Maker must be better than himself.
That part of the Bible is inspired, I do not deny, in
the sense that all good thoughts are the result of
inspiration, but only as we share the inspiration of the
Bible can we distinguish between the noble and the
base in it, between the eternal and that which is fast
passing away. But as we do not expect to find that
inspiration, now-a-days, guards men from much error,
both of word and deed, so we should not expect to find
it otherwise in days gone by; nor should we wonder
that the man who spoke of God as showing His tender
fatherhood by punishing and correcting, could so sink
down into hard thoughts of that loving Father as to
say that it was a fearful thing to fall into His hands.
These contradictions meet us in every man; they are
the highest and the lowest moments of the human
soul. Only as we are inspired to love and patience in
our conduct towards men, will our words be inspired
when we speak of God.
Having thus seen what inspiration does not do, we
must glance at what it really is. It is, perhaps,
natural that we, rejecting, as we do, with somewhat of
vehemence, the idea of supernatural revelation, should
oftentimes be accused of denying all revelation and
disbelieving all inspiration. But even as we are not
atheists, although we deny the Godhead of Jesus, so
are we not unbelievers in inspiration because we
refuse to bend our necks beneath the yoke of an
inspired Bible. For we believe in a God too mighty
and too universal to be wrapped in swaddling clothes
or buried in a cave, and we believe in an inspiration
too mighty and too universal to belong only to one
nation and to one age. As the air is as free and as
�18
On Inspiration.
refreshing to us as it was to Isaiah, to Jesus, or to
Paul, so does the spiritual air of God’s Spirit breathe
as softly and as refreshingly on our brows as on theirs.
We have eyes to see and ears to hear quite as much
as they had in Judea long ago. “If God be nmmpresent and omniactive, this inspiration is no miracle,
but a regular mode of God’s action on conscious Spirit,
as gravitation on unconscious matter. It is not a rare
condescension of God, but a universal uplifting of man.
To obtain a knowledge of duty, a man is not sent
away outside of himself to ancient documents for the
only rule of faith and practice ; the Word is very nigh
him, even in his heart, and by this word he is to try
all documents whatever. . . . Wisdom, Righteous
ness, and Love are the Spirit of God in the soul of
man; wherever these are, and just in proportion to
their power, there is inspiration from God. . .
Inspiration is : . . the in-come of God to the
soul, in the form of Truth through the Reason, of
Right through the Conscience, of Love and Faith
through the Affections and Religious Element. . . .
A man would be looked on as mad who should claim
miraculous inspiration for Newton, as they have been
who denied it in the case of Moses. But no candid
man will doubt that, humanly speaking, it was a more
difficult thing to write the Principia than to write the
Decalogue. Man must have a nature most sadly
anamalous if, unassisted, he is able to accomplish all
the triumphs of modern science, and yet cannot discover
the plainest and most important principles of Religion
and Morality without a miraculous inspiration; and
still more so if, being able to discover by God’s natural
aid these chief and most important principles, he needs
a miraculous inspiration to disclose minor details.”*
Thus we believe that inspiration from God is the birth
right of humanity, and to be an heir of God it needs
Theodore Parker.
�On Inspiration.
19
only to be a son of man. Earth’s treasures are highly
priced and hard to win, but God’s blessings are, like the
rain and the sunshine, showered on all-comers.
“ ’Tis only heaven is given away;
’Tis only God may be had for the asking;
No price is set on the lavish summer;
June may be had by the poorest comer.”
If inspiration were indeed that which it is thought
to be by the orthodox Christians, surely we ought to
be able to distinguish its sayings from those of the
uninspired. If inspiration be confined to the Christian
Bible, how is it that the inspired thoughts were in
many cases spoken out to the world hundreds of years
before they fell from the lips of an inspired Jew 1 It
seems a somewhat uncalled for miraculous interference
for a man to be supernaturally inspired to inform the
world of some moral truth which had been well known
for hundreds of years to a large portion of the race.
Or is it that a great moral truth bears within itself so
little evidence of its royal birth, that it cannot be
accepted as ruler by divine right over men until its
proclamation is signed by some duly accredited mes
senger of the Most High ? Then, indeed, must God
be “more cognizable by the senses than by the soul
and then “ the eye or the ear is a truer and quicker
percipient of Deity than the Spirit which came forth
from Him.”* Was Paul inspired when he wished
himself accursed for his brethren’s sake, but Kwan-yin
uninspired, when she said, “ Never will I seek nor
receive private individual salvation; never enter into
final peace alone?” If Jesus and the prophets were
inspired when they placed mercy above sacrifice, was
Manu uninspired in saying that a man li will fall very
low if he performs ceremonial acts only, and fails to
discharge his moral duties?” Was Jesus inspired
�20
On Inspiration.
when, he taught that the whole law was comprehended
in one saying, namely, “Thou shalt love thy neigh
bour as thyself? and yet was Confucius uninspired
when, in answer to the question, “ What one word
would serve as a rule to one’s whole life ?” he said,
“ Reciprocity; what you do not wish done to yourself,
do not to others.
Or take the Talmud and study it,
and then judge from what uninspired source Jesus
drew much of His highest teaching. “ Whoso looketh
on the wife of another with a lustful eye, is considered
as if he had committed adultery.”—(Kalah.) “With
what measure we mete, we shall be measured again.”
—(Johanan.) “ What thou wouldst not like to be done
to thyself, do not to others j this is the fundamental
law.”—(Hillel.) “ If he be admonished to take the
splinter out of his eye, he would answer, Take the
beam out of thine own.”—(Tarphon.) “ Imitate God
in His goodness. Be towai’ds thy fellow-creatures as
He is towards the whole creation. Clothe the naked ;
heal the sick; comfort the afflicted; be a brother to
the children of thy Bather.” The whole parable of the
houses built on the rock and on the sand is taken out
of the Talmud, and such instances of quotation might
be indefinitely multiplied. What do they all prove ?
That there is no inspiration in the Bible? by no
means. But surely that inspiration is not confined to
the Bible, but is spread over the world; that much in
all “sacred books ” is the outcome of inspired minds at
their highest, although we find the same books con
taining gross and low thoughts. We should always
remember that although the Bible is more specially a
revelation to us of the Western nations than are the
Vedas and the Zend-Avesta, that it is only so because
it is better suited to our modes of thought, and because
it has been one of the agents in our education. The
reverence with which we may regard the Bible as
bound up with many sacred memories, and as the
chosen teacher of many of our greatest minds and
�On Inspiration.
21
purest characters, is rightly directed in other nations
to their own sacred books. The books are really all
on a level, with much good and much bad in them all;
but as the Hebrew was inspired to proclaim that “ the
Lord thy God is one Lord ” to the Hebrews, so was
the Hindoo inspired to proclaim to Hindoos, “There
is only one Deity, the great Soul.” Either all are
inspired, or none are. They stand on the same footing.
And we rejoice to believe that one Spirit breathes in
all, and that His inspiration is ours to-day. “The
Father worketh hitherto,” although men fancy He is
resting in an eternal Sabbath. The orthodox tell us
that, in rejecting the rule of morality laid down for us
ia the Bible, and in trusting ourselves to this inspiration of the free Spirit of God, our faith and our
morality will alike be shifting and unstable. But we
reck not of their warnings ; our faith and our morality
are only shifting in this sense, that, as we grow holier,
and purer, and wiser, our conception of God and of
righteousness will rise and expand with our growth.
It was a golden saying of one of God’s noblest sons
that “no man knoweth the Father save the Sonto
know God we must resemble Him, as we see in the
child the likeness of the parent. But in trusting our
selves to the guidance of the Spirit of God, we are not
building the house of our faith on the shifting sand;
rather are we “ dwelling in a city that hath founda
tions, whose builder and maker is God.” Wisely was
it sung of old, “ Except the Lord build the house, their
labour is but lost that build it.” Vain are all efforts
of priestly coercion; vain all toils of inspired books;
vain the utter sacrifice of reason and conscience ; their
labour is but lost when they strive to build a temple
of human faith, strong enough to bear the long strain
of time, or the earthquake-shock of grief. God only,
by the patient guiding of His love, by the direct
inspiration of His Spirit, can lay, stone by stone, and
timber by timber, that priceless fabric of trust and
�22
On Inspiration.
love, which shall outlive all attacks and all changes,
and shall stand in the human soul as long as His own
Eternity endures.
4
TURNBULL AND SPEARS, PRINTERS, EDINBURGH.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Victorian Blogging
Description
An account of the resource
A collection of digitised nineteenth-century pamphlets from Conway Hall Library & Archives. This includes the Conway Tracts, Moncure Conway's personal pamphlet library; the Morris Tracts, donated to the library by Miss Morris in 1904; the National Secular Society's pamphlet library and others. The Conway Tracts were bound with additional ephemera, such as lecture programmes and handwritten notes.<br /><br />Please note that these digitised pamphlets have been edited to maximise the accuracy of the OCR, ensuring they are text searchable. If you would like to view un-edited, full-colour versions of any of our pamphlets, please email librarian@conwayhall.org.uk.<br /><br /><span><img src="http://www.heritagefund.org.uk/sites/default/files/media/attachments/TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" width="238" height="91" alt="TNLHLF_Colour_Logo_English_RGB_0_0.jpg" /></span>
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Conway Hall Library & Archives
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
2018
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Conway Hall Ethical Society
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Pamphlet
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
On inspiration
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Besant, Annie Wood
Description
An account of the resource
Place of publication: London
Collation: 22 p. ; 18 cm.
Notes: From the library of Dr Moncure Conway. Includes bibliographical references. Date of publication from KVK. Author attribution from British Library.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
Thomas Scott
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
[1875]
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
CT102
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
<a href="http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/"><img src="http://i.creativecommons.org/p/mark/1.0/88x31.png" alt="Public Domain Mark" /></a><span> </span><br /><span>This work (On inspiration), identified by </span><a href="https://conwayhallcollections.omeka.net/items/show/www.conwayhall.org.uk"><span>Humanist Library and Archives</span></a><span>, is free of known copyright restrictions.</span>
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Language
A language of the resource
English
Subject
The topic of the resource
Christianity
Christianity-Controversial Literature
Conway Tracts