The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1884-01-16

. y.
sayers. This is to be done by sound
doctrine or the faithful word limo
thy is expressly charged to avoid pro-
fame and vain babblings and oppositions
of Science falsely SO called" as also
" foolish and ignorant questionings." The
world is to be converted, according to the
Scriptures, by preaching the Word and
testifying repentance toward God and
faith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.
(d) Apt to teach, Tim. iii 2. AS this
is the only passage, so far as we know,
slied upon to sustain the requirements
of our standard in respect to Languages,
Philosophy, Logic, Rhetoric, etc., it de-
serves a special alysis. We remark
then
a. That these words are in our ver-
sion of Paul's catalogue of qualifications
for Bishops, and found in l Tim. iii: 2.
AS the titles Elder and Bishop are con-
fessedly interchangeable, and refer to the
same officers, and there is no limitations
here, then it follows that this require
ment can intend no other qualification
than that which every Elder should have.
But if these words are authority for the
classical qualifications required by our
standard of ministers, then we must log
ically go step further-den,a'ad the
same of every ruling Elder. This, how
ever, cuts too deep. Our opponents are
in this dilemma: they must either aban-
don these words as a warrant for the
ministerial qualifications now required,
or they must insert in our Book CORES
ponding schedule in respect to the elder
ship. They may take either horn. Ac-
cording to our view, this passage is a
proof that ruling Elders and ministers of
the Word were both Bishops, and dis
tinguished from each other not by the
gift of teaching, which was common to
both, but the gift of preaching, which
was possessed only by ministers Hence,
both are required to be apt to teach
(2) The single Greek word here trans
lated apt to teach is exactly rendered
by our word Didactic which Webster
defines thus: Adapted to teach" Scott
expounds the word thus: Ready at
teaching-both capable of instructing
others and prompt to embrace every oc-
casion of doingit." Bengel says: This
implies not only competency and readi-
ness in teaching, but more especially pa
thence and diligence" Bloomfeld's in
depreciation is, Possessing the knowl-
edge and faculty necessary" - fitness to
teach. 1t is evident from these exposi-
tions that the original is indefinite in it.
self, and in every case of its use must be
limited by the subject matter of the
teaching. In this case it means COM
petent knowledge of the gospel, with
ability to impart it" But the word is
luminous in the light of
49, Scripture example. And here we
affirm that, so far as is known, it is (o)
Not certain that any one of the apostles
or ministers in the apostolic Church I'M
derstood the ancient Hebrew The YER
nacular dialect of the Jews of Palestine
was an Aramaic modification Of the an
Gent Hebrew, and Alexander says where
Paul is reported, Acts xxi: 49, as speak
ing to the people in the Hebrew
tongue" it is probable this Aramaic mod
iication is intended. (b) 1t is certain
that many of the early teachers and
preachers did not understand either He
brew or Latin-this may be positively
affirmed of such as were either HELEN
istic or Alexandrian Jews. The vernac-
uldA vi ouCn WdS IHS OIS0hJ anu Guo Wei
sion of Scripture most familiar to them,
and most common at that day, was the
Septuagint. This version seems to have
been the one almost exclusively used In
the synagogues. AS to philosophy and
the sciences many of them had mot 80
much as heard whether there be any
such things. They were sound in doc
trine, able to teach, and exhort, and
preach, and convince gainsay
in the Scriptures. We doubt whether
Peter, or Matthew, or the sons of Zebe-
dee, or Barnabas, or Andronicus, or Ze-
mas the lawyer, knew more of Philosophy
and the natural and exact sciences, than
Onesimus, the runaway slave of Phile-
mon, and yet they filled Paul's prescrip-
ton for Bishop apt to teach 1t is
not enough to reply, The advanced
scholarship of this age demands cor
responding Interpretation of these words.
Ministers who were apt to teach then,
would not be so noaO." This either i'm
peaches the wisdom of Christ in prescrib-
ing the same qualification for his ambas-
sailors for all time, or it abandons the
doctrine of definite scriptural standard,
and accepts erpedje7acy as the rule. But
why are ministers who were "apt TO
teach in Paul's day, not so now2 There
were Philosophy, 'oppositions of science,
Rhetoric, Logic, the natural and exact
sciences then. Most of the heresies
which are now put forward as original
81 ,,or,- L. fo,,J 1900 -,