THE PROMISES OF JESUS.

The term inspiration, when applied to the sacred books, designates the characteristic which they are supposed to have derived from the inspiration of their writers. When applied to the writers, it means the supposed miraculous action of the Spirit of God in their minds, by which they were caused to write as God willed. The term in its substantive form is not used in the New Testament; but it occurs in its adjective form (θεὁπνευστος, God-inspired), and in this form it is applied to the Scriptures of the Old Testament (II. Tim. iii. 16).

The inquiry whether the New Testament books possess this characteristic, may be prosecuted in two ways: first, by considering what the writers themselves have said on the subject; and second, by considering the question whether such books could have been written by uninspired nun. We have laid the basis for the first in Part Third, by finding that these writers are thoroughly credible in all their statements. Whatever tiny say, therefore, on the subject now before us we can believe implicitly, and we will take up this branch of the inquiry first.

If there is any kind or degree of inspiration which believers must affirm and defend, it is that which is set forth in the New Testament books themselves. It would be irrelevant to the subject of Evidences of Christianity, and useless in itself, to discuss any other. But before we can determine whether to defend it or not, we must ascertain precisely what it is. This is to be done, not, as many writers on the subject seem to have supposed, by formulating a theory of inspiration, and then searching the Scriptures to find support for it; but by studying the Scripture presentation of the subject, and accepting that as our theory. Now it so happens that the subject is presented in the New Testament in a way quite favorable to successful investigation. We are furnished, first, with a number of promises of inspiration made by Jesus to the Apostles; second, with some very explicit statements made by the Apostles and others, which show the fulfillment of these promises; and third, with many facts and statements which help to define the limits of the inspiration thus set forth. We shall consider these in the order in which we have named them.

The first promise of Jesus on the subject is quoted by Matthew in the following words: "But beware of men: for they will deliver you up to councils, and in their synagogues will they scourge you; yea, and before governors and kings shall ye be brought for my sake, for a testimony to them and the Gentiles. But when they deliver you up, be not anxious how or what ye shall speak: for it shall be given you in that hour what ye shall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you (x. 17-20). The same promise is quoted by Mark and Luke, with the variation in the latter, "for the Holy Spirit shall teach you in that very hour what ye ought to say" (Mark xiii. 11; Luke xii. 12). Here we have first a prohibition, "Be not anxious"; and it has reference to two things: first, how they shall speak; and second, what they shall speak. Under "how" is included the manner of speech; that is, the style, diction and arrangement; under "what," the matter; that is, the thoughts and facts. They are told not to be anxious about any of these, even when their lives depended on what they would say. It is impossible that mortal man should be free from anxiety under such circumstances, without supernatural aid. It follows that the reason which Jesus proceeds to give for this prohibition is the only one that could be given by a rational being. It is this: "For it shall be given you in that hour what ye shall speak: for it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you;" "for the Holy Spirit shall teach you in that hour what ye ought to say." This assurance would be sufficient to free them from anxiety, if they could only implicitly believe it; but what an implicit faith it required! How different from the feeble faith which now staggers at the thought that such a promise as this was ever realized!

In the words, "It is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father that speaketh in you," we have an obvious instance of the well known Hebrew idiom by which in comparisons the absolute negative is put for the relative. They did speak, as appears from the fact that the Holy Spirit was to teach them what they ought to say; but as their speaking was to be controlled by the Spirit in them, it was not they only or chiefly that spoke, but the Holy Spirit.

The second promise is reported by Luke alone. Jesus, after telling the disciples in his prophetic discourse on the destruction of Jerusalem, that they should be delivered up to synagogues and prisons, and be brought before governors and kings, continues: "Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate beforehand how to answer: for I will give you a mouth and wisdom which all your adversaries shall not be able to withstand or to gainsay" (xxi. 12-15). Here the prohibition advances from anxiety to premeditation. A courageous man, after proper premeditation, might make a speech on the effect of which his life depended, with comparative freedom from anxiety; but who could enter upon such a speech without anxiety and at the same time without premeditation? The Apostles were not only told to do this, but the order is made emphatic by the words with which it is introduced: "Settle it therefore in your hearts." These words, while emphasizing the order, suggest also that it was to be the settled purpose of their hearts to carry the order into actual use. Such an order would have been but idle breath to these men, had it not been accompanied with the only assurance which could possibly make it practicable, the assurance that Christ would give them wisdom ample for each occasion; and he was to give it, as they knew from the previous promise, by the power of the Holy Spirit within them.

The third promise was made in the memorable discourse delivered on the night of the betrayal. The items of it are found in several distinct passages of the speech: "I will pray the Father, and he will send you another Advocate, that he may be with you forever, even the Spirit of truth, whom the world can not receive; for it beholdeth him not, neither knoweth him: ye know him, for he abideth with you, and shall be in you." "These things have I spoken unto you, while yet abiding with you. But the Advocate, even the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you." "I have yet many things to say to you, but ye can not bear them now. Howbeit, when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he shall guide you into all the truth: for he shall not speak from himself; but what things soever he shall hear, these shall he speak: and he shall declare unto you the things that are to come" (Jno. xiv. 15-17, 26; xvi. 12, 13). In this promise Jesus assures the disciples, first, that the Holy Spirit would be with them and in them always, as a substitute for his own presence. Second, that he should teach them all things, and bring to their remembrance all that he had spoken to them. Third, that he would guide them into all the truth. Doubtless, by "all things," and "all the truth," we are to understand all that was needful for the discharge of their office as Apostles; and by all that he had said to them, all that was needed by them, and that they did not already remember; but these are the only limitations which we could dare to assign to the very explicit words employed.

The fourth promise was given on the day of the ascension. After charging the disciples not to depart from Jerusalem till they received the promise of the Father which he had previously mentioned, lie tells them: "Ye shall be baptized in the Holy Spirit not many days hence;" "Ye shall receive power when the Holy Spirit is come upon you: and ye shall be my witnesses both in Jerusalem and in all Judea and Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth" (Acts i. 5, 8). Here that same gift of the Spirit previously promised is called a baptism in the Spirit--a figure which designates the subsidence of their own mental powers in those of the Holy Spirit when he should come upon them; and he assures them that they should then receive power, and be his witnesses in every land. The power necessary to be such witnesses, as we learn from the sequel, is both the power to work physical miracles and the power to speak with absolute knowledge concerning the exaltation of Jesus, and concerning his will in all things on which he had not spoken in person.  

If these several promises were fulfilled to the disciples the latter were endowed as follows:  

a. The Spirit of God came upon them with such power that their spirits were figuratively immersed in it, and it abode in them to the end of their days.  

b. It gave them, or taught them, what to say and how to say it, in such measure that on the most trying occasions they could speak with unerring wisdom, and yet without anxiety or premeditation. It was not they that spoke, but the Holy Spirit that spoke in them; that is, the Holy Spirit, and not they, was the responsible speaker.  

c. To the end of enabling them thus to speak, it recalled to their memory, as fully as was needful, all that Jesus had in person spoken; and as the words he had spoken were intimately blended with the, deeds he had done, it undoubtedly recalled these also. This was especially needed when they were to speak or write concerning his earthly career.  

d. To the same end, it guided them into all truth yet untaught, which it was the will of Christ that they should know and teach. This was needful in order that their utterances concerning those items of God's will which they alone have revealed, that is, their statements concerning things in the spirit world and in the future of time and eternity, might be received as the word of God.

It is not uncommon to hear it said that the authors of our four Gospels do not claim to have written by inspiration. It is true that Mark and Luke set up no such claim for themselves, but it is far otherwise in reference to Matthew and John. In setting forth these promises of Jesus, as all four of these writers do, they mean either to assert that Matthew and John, who were of the Twelve, experienced their fulfillment, or that they remained unfulfilled. No matter what we may think of the truthfulness of these writers, we can not suppose they meant the latter, and thereby meant that their Master made promises which he failed to fulfill. Unquestionably they intended to convey the thought that every one of these promises was fulfilled; and they wrote at a time when the fulfillment was a fact of their own past experience or observation.