OLD TESTAMENT IN THE NEW.

The Old and New Testaments, or Covenants, constitute Vols. I. and II. of God’s Book. The manner in which the writers of Vol. II. use Vol. I. shows their high estimate of its importance and truthfulness. They quote from it 820 times, besides alluding to it hundreds of times. If there are mistakes in the Old Testament that need correction, as the Higher Critics tell us, it is certain that in some of these 320 quotations the mistakes would have been clearly indicated. If, on the other hand, the words they quote are the very words of God, this also will be abundantly manifested in the unhesitating acceptance and unquestioning submission with which they receive Old Testament statements.

Genesis is quoted 19 times, and the quotations appear in 9 New Testament books. Exodus is quoted 24 times, and the quotations appear in 12 New Testament books. Leviticus is quoted 12 times, and the quotations appear in 9 New Testament books. Numbers is quoted twice, besides many plain allusions to its incidents as historically true, for example, 1 Cor. x. 6-10; and these appear in 9 New Testament books. Deuteronomy is quoted 26 times, and these appear in 13 New Testament books. The Psalms are quoted 59 times in 12 New Testament books. Isaiah is quoted 50 times in 11 New Testament books. Proverbs 6 times in 6 New Testament books. Zechariah 6 times in 4 New Testament books; and other books of the Old Testament are quoted as from God.

Nor is this all. Our Lord Jesus Christ deliberately places the seal and sanction of His approval and authority upon Old Testament narratives, which Higher Criticism in its developed form rejects as “legends,” “myths,” “unbelievable,” “unthinkable,” on account of their supernatural and miraculous character. Thus He speaks “of the creation which God created,” Mark xiii. 19; He tells us that when the law was given, “God commanded, saying,” Matt. xv. 4; that “as touching the resurrection the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God saying?” Matt. xxii. 31; that the story of the flood is true. Matt. xxiv. 37-39: that the stories of Elijah and Elisha are true, Lu. iv. 25-27: that the stories of Noah and Lot, and the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and Lot’s wife, are true, Lu. xvii. 2632; Matt. xi. 21-24. If any professing Christian is prepared to say that the divine Redeemer was mistaken, or that He connived at lies, there is nothing to do but “to deliver such an one unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus, 1 Cor. v. 5. There is no other hope for him.

Nor is this all. “Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying,” Matt. i. 22; “Thus it is written through the prophet . . . That it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the Lord through the prophet, saying. . . Then was fulfilled that which was spoken through Jeremiah the prophet. . . That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophets,” Matt, ii. 5, 15, 17, 23; “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the prophet,” Matt, viii. 17; “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through Isaiah the prophet,” Matt. xii. 17; “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophet,” Matt. xiii. 35; “That it might be fulfilled which was spoken through the prophet,” Matt. xxi. 4; “When ye therefore shall see the abomination of desolation spoken of through Daniel the prophet,” Matt. xxiv. 15; “Then was fulfilled that which was spoken of through Jeremiah the prophet,” Matt, xxvii. 9.

In these passages a preposition is used which Bagster’s Analytical Lexicon defines as meaning, “through, of immediate agency, causation, instrumentality, by means of.” Parkhurst says, “a preposition, perhaps ‘from the Hebrew, dah-ghali, to drive, impel.” Winer says, “the primary signification is through, throughout. . . There is an easy transition from this primary signification (as in all languages) to that of the (animate or inanimate) instrument, as something through which the effect as it were proceeds.”. . . In a few instances it “might appear as synonymous with hupo or para, but even in this case it does not denote the author as such, i. e., as the one from whom something proceeds, but rather the person through whose exertion or benevolence, etc., something is given to another.” It is evident, therefore, that behind the prophets is another person, and this Person is God.

Observe, also, how everywhere hi the New Testament Isaiah is represented as writing the prophecy called by his name, and that there is no dream of a Deutero-Isaiah, Matt. iii. 3; iv. 14; viii. 17; xii. 17; xiii. 14; xv. 7; Mark vii. 6; Lu. iii. 4; iv. 17; Jno. i. 23; xii. 38, 39, 41; Acts viii, 28, 30; |xxviii. 25; Rom. ix. 27, 29; x. 16, 20; xv. 12.

Observe, further, how our Lord and the Evangelists and the Jews all unite in saying that Moses wrote the Pentateuch, contrary to the opinion of the Higher Critics, Matt. viii. 4; xvii. 3, 4; xix. 7, 8; xxii. 24; Mark i. 44; vii. 10; x. 3, 4; xii. 19; Lu. v. 14; ix. 30; xx. 28, 37; Jno. i. 45; iii. 14; v. 45, 46; vi. 82; vii. 19, 22; viii. 5; ix. 29; and more than 30 times in other places in the New Testament. Observe once more how our Lord explicitly says that Daniel wrote his prophecy, directly in the face of the Higher Critics like Archdeacon Farrar, who assigns the date of the book to 164 B. C., thus making it a vile forgery, or as he politely calls it b “a romance,” Matt. xxiv. 15.

“Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for He hath visited and redeemed His people, and hath raised up an horn of salvation for us, in the house of His servant David; as He ' spake by the mouth of His holy prophets, which have been since the world began,” Lu. i. 68-70, Who spake? God.  “Men, brethren, this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake,” Acts i. 16. Who spake? The ; Holy Ghost. How did He speak? Through the mouth of David. “Lord, thou art God, which hast made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and all that in them is; who by the mouth of thy servant David hast said, Acts iv. 24, 25. Who said? God. How did He say? Through the mouth of His servant David. “The God of glory appeared unto our father Abraham, . . . and said unto him,” Acts vii. 2, 3. “Well spake the Holy Ghost through Isaiah the prophet,” Acts xxviii. 25.

The same remarkable fact is clearly brought out in the Epistles. “Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God, which He had promised afore through His prophets in the Holy Scriptures,” Rom. i. 1, 2. Who promised? God. How did He promise? Through His prophets. Where did He promise? In the Holy Scriptures; but if the Old Testament Scriptures are full of “errors,” “mistakes,” “contradictions,” “legends,” “myths,” it is certain that Paul would not have spoken of them as “holy.” “What saith the Scripture?” Rom. iv. 3. This is the end of discussion and dispute. God said unto her. . . . He saith to Moses. . . . The Scripture saith unto Pharaoh. . . . As He saith also in Hosea,” Rom. ix. 12, 15, 17, 25. The little phrase, “It is written,” occurs 18 times in Romans as authoritative and final.

“God hath said, I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they shall be my people. Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you and be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters, saith the Lord Almighty,” 2 Cor. vi. 16-18, “The Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith,” Gal. iii. 8. How can the Scripture foresee? Only because its words are divinely inspired, and therefore may be said to possess the attributes of God. “Now to Abraham and Ms seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many? but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ,” Gal. iii. 16. Here the apostle bases a most important doctrine upon the difference between seeds and seed, making the argument turn upon the letter “s.” “The Scripture hath concluded all under sin,” Gal. iii. 22. How can the Scripture shut up together all under sin, unless it is armed with the power of God?

“For it is written, that Abraham had two sons; the one by a bondmaid, the other by a free woman. . . . Nevertheless what saith the Scripture? Cast out the bondwoman and her son: for the son of the bondwoman shall not be heir with the son of the freewoman,” Gal. iv. 22-30. Prof. Briggs says in The Bible, The Church and The Reason, p. 112, “To us this seems invalid and without force.” No doubt; but some of “us” would rather agree with the Apostle Paul than with the Professor, especially as there are men of far greater learning, of far sounder judgment, and far more reverent spirit, to whom this does not seem invalid and without force.

“Wherefore as the Holy Ghost saith,” Heb. iii. 7; “For we which have believed do enter into rest; as He said,” Heb. iv, 8; “The Holy Ghost also is a witness to ns: for after that He had said before,” Heb. x. 15; “See that ye refuse not Mm that speaketh. For if they escaped not who refused him that spake on earth, much more shall not we escape if we turn away from Him that speaketh from heaven: whose voice then shook the earth; but now He hath promised, saying, Yet once more I shake not the earth only, but also heaven. And this word, Yet once more, signifieth the removing of those things that are shaken,” Heb. xii. 25-27. Hence a most solemn truth is built upon one little expression taken from the prophecy through Haggai.

No matter, then, who were the writers of the Old Testament Scriptures, the Lord stood behind them and spoke through their lips, and wrote through their pens. If this is so, say some very thoughtless persons, how can we account for the differences of style? This is a most childish objection. Sir Walter Scott as a lawyer and Deputy-Sheriff had one kind of style, and as a novelist he had another kind of style, and as a poet he had another kind of style, and as a writer of history he had another kind of style; but it was the same mind that dictated all these styles. Is the infinite God more limited than a poor mortal? His book is one as the sea, many as the waves. It is like a grand organ with its hundreds of pipes, emitting every variety of sound, but all supplied by the air or wind from one chest, and all controlled by one master hand.

For many centuries it has gone on, sending forth its deep and thrilling warnings, its gentle entreaties, its plaintive notes of sorrow; and while millions and millions of books have perished, “the word of the Lord endureth for ever,” 1 Pet. i. 25. There is a medal still existing, ordered by the emperor Diocletian to celebrate the extinction of the name of Christian; but a sufficient reply to the empty taunt is the fact that the British Bible Society has published more than 312,000,000 copies of the Scriptures, and translated them into 350 languages, 70 of these less than a hundred years ago possessing no alphabet, nor the slightest vestige of a literature. Besides these, many millions more have been printed by other Bible Societies and various publishing houses. Human productions soon perish, like the names of their authors; yet t h ere is one Book that can sing,

“Men may come, and men may go,
But I flow on for ever.”

Well might Heine, the German poet, write, “What a Book! great and wide as the world, rooted in the depths of creation and mounting into the mysterious azure of the heavens. Indeed it is God’s Word, while all other books evince only human skill.”