Part 3

2. There is the widest possible distinction between variation and contradiction. If two writers give an account of the same event, they will each regard it from their own point of view, and describe it as it impressed themselves. Hence one will bring into prominence certain facts which are altogether omitted by another. But such a variation is totally different from contradiction. An excellent illustration of this is found in the case of the inscription over the cross, a case which Dean Alford considers decisive against verbal inspiration. Now I am quite ready to admit that, if there were contradiction, it would be decisive. But I deny that there is any contradiction whatever. There is variation, but nothing more. All agree in the emphatic point—’The king of the Jews,’ and the only difference is that some give in addition a few more words than others. But these added words are not at variance with each other. On the contrary, they all combine in one sentence, which probably formed the real inscription. That sentence is Οὔτός ἐστιν Ἰησους ὄ Ναζαραίος ὄ Βασιλεὺς των Ἰουδαίων. ‘This is Jesus of Nazareth the king of the Jews.’ Now, supposing that to have been the real sentence, so that each of the evangelists omitted some of the explanatory words, while all preserved, ‘The king of the Jews,’ which was the real point of the inscription, there was no discrepancy or contradiction in such omissions, nor anything to affect our full and complete reliance in the verbal accuracy of all the four evangelists.

3. It is also most important for us to remember that such variations are essential to the value of a fourfold testimony. If God had seen fit to impart His truth by direct communication only, then I freely grant that I should have expected a _verbatim_ agreement in the narratives. But in that case there would have been no employment of the human element. Nay more; if the life of our Lord had been so reported, the evidence would have become single, instead of fourfold. Even, as it is, it has been argued that the resemblance is so accurate as to show that the evangelists copied from one common tradition, and must not be regarded as independent witnesses. The variation therefore becomes almost as important to us as the agreement, and, instead of shaking our convictions, confirms them. That blessed Redeemer is the corner-stone of our hopes, and therefore, instead of two witnesses, which under the law were sufficient, He has given us two pair of witnesses. And in the inspiration of their words He has given so much scope to the human element that there are all the variations inseparable from independent testimony; while, on the other hand, He has so guided, directed, and controlled the whole, that, notwithstanding all the cavils of sceptics, there is no real contradiction in their statements. There is variation enough to prove the independence of their evidence, while there is such a depth in their complete agreement, as can only be explained by the fact that they were taught by God’s Spirit to convey to us infallible truth.

Other objections have, I know, been urged; but all, I firmly believe, may be fully and fairly met by the principle that it has pleased God in His own wisdom to combine in the one book the divine and human element. In some cases the mind of the man may be more conspicuous than the mind of the Spirit, while in others the mind of the Spirit seems completely to overrule the mind of the author who wrote the words. In some passages the thoughts are so far within man’s compass that no inspiration appears to be necessary, while in others they dive so deep into hidden mysteries that they far outstep the utmost range of the human intellect. Thus God has given us a record of what man has felt, as well as a statement of His own hidden will. He has given it through the medium of minds of the same nature as our own; but by His own mysterious power He has given their writings such a divine authority that they claim our unwavering trust; so that, notwithstanding the cavils of infidels, and the sneers of those who despise us as bibliolaters, we heartily thank God for our Bibles, and receive as divine all that God has taught in them, believing without reserve the statement of St. Peter, that ‘Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.’

* * * * *

* * * * *

* * * * *

LONDON: Printed by JOHN STRANGEWAYS, Castle St. Leicester Sq.

* * * * *

FOOTNOTES.

{5a} _Essays and Reviews_, p. 347.

{5b} Ibid. p. 345.

{8} _Inspiration of Holy Scripture_.

{45} _Essays_, p. 348.