Northwestern Bible School - Scroll Yearbook (Minneapolis, MN)

Page 10 text:

Du. W. B. Rilkv

Page 9 text:

CONTENTS: ADMINISTRATION SCENES CLASSES ORGANIZATION MEDITATION ACTIVITIES STUDENT LIFE HUMOR

Page 11 text:

THE BIBLE—Is It Inspired? W. B. It i lev “AU script are is gtuen by inspiration of God” —II Tim. 3:16. TUDENTS in the Northwestern Bible Training School art; uniformly taught O that the Bible is the inspired Word of God. Without exception the graduates of the institution have gone forth to propagate such a faith. Is there an adequate defense of this faithr Are our students justified in accepting it? Wc briefly ex¬ press here sonic of the reasons for such teaching. The supreme question for the twentieth century student is this: “The Bible is it an inspiration?” Since this question affects the very life of Christianity itself, I claim at once an inalienable right and a comparative fitness for its discussion. THE CLAIM OF INSPIRATION That contention has hack of it the dear claims of the B ' Me itself. Every prophet professes to record what he received from God. Tlie Old Testament claimed that word and thought alike were given of God. God was with Moses ' mouth. Ex. f: 10-12, and taught him what he should say. God was in David ' s tongue, 2 Sam. 23:1-2, imparting speech God put Ilis testimony into Jeremiah ' s mouth, Jer 1 ;6A). The New Testament writers were equally explicit in their contention of divine authority. Peter said. “No prophecy ever came by the will of man.” Paul contended that both the thoughts and words in which he expressed himself were alike inspired, 1 Cor. 2:12-13. Jesus said of His speech, The Father gave me a commandment, what I should say and what 1 should speak. I)r. Kuvper has wisely remarked, You can as easily have music without notes or mathematics without figures as thoughts without words! The only thoughts that have been regarded as of sufficient importance to record had first to take the form of words, and that theory of the inspiration of the Bible which accords divinity to the thoughts and denies it to the language in which they Hire clothed, is as illogical as ijnscriptural, as unscientific as superficial. Again, it has beneath it the buttressing walls of Bible History. This hook is not a novelty. Its latest utterances wear the ermined majesty of millenniums. Its every page has been exposed to any and every investigator, friend or foe, for thousands of years and in all eases where unbelieving prejudice did not exceed that of Pilate, candid men have been compelled to say, Wc find no fault in it.” For fifty years every turn of the archaeological spade lias proven tlm moral dishonesty and scientific inaccuracy of Bible opponents. Concerning the New Testament the case of divinity in origin and preservation is stronger still. Unmade, the destructive critic, has to consent that the four Gospels belong to the First Century and that the hook (if the Acts is a companion piece. Paul looms too large in history for any intelligent man to dispute either his existence or Ins authorship and as for John and the Revelation, we have the writings of his disciples extant, witnessing alike to his personality and his pro¬ duction. Its enemies themselves being witnesses, there is not a New Testament book nor yet a New Testament author named, whose inspiration has been success¬ fully disputed. The claim of inspiration has around about it the hotly of Christ—the Church, That institution must be accounted for, and the Bible alone provides an explana¬ tion, Its twenty centuries of challenging conquering history demand interpreta¬ tion. Walter Itauseiibusch, a critic, said of it: ft has abolished slavery, miti¬ gated war, covered all lands with a network of charities to uplift the poor and the fallen, fostered the institutions of education, aided the progress of civil liberty and social justice, and diffused a softening tenderness throughout human life. It