Pittsburg dispatch. [volume] (Pittsburg [Pa.]) 1880-1923, 1890-01-12
THE OLD TESTAMENT.
St. Paul's Comprehensive Definition
of Its Purpose and Lesson.
NOT A SCIENTIFIC TEXT BOOK.
ITS DARK PICTURES INSPIRE HOPE
WRITTEN roR TIE prsrAroH.I

Whatsoever things were written afore-
time were written for our learning, that we
through patience and comfort of the Scrip
lures might have hope"
There are set down in this sentence two
facts about the Bible: First, that the Bible
was written for our learning; and, second,
that the result of diligent learning Of the
Bible will be hope. Here, then, is defined
the purpose and the lesson of the Word of
God.
The sentence was written only as paren-
thesis in an argument st. Paul had quoted
something from the Bible, and in that con-
nection he stops by the way to give reason
for making such a quotation. But the rea-
son is this comprehensive definition OF the
purpose and the lesson of the Bible. can
not think of any phrase which better
sets forth the reason why the Bible was
written, than that 1t twas written for our
lesrning;" nor can bring to mind any
single word which more adequately sums
up the best Of all that the devoutesr students
are able to find in the Bible than the word
''hope'
It is well, in these DAYS, to emphasize the
fact which st. Paul states here that the
Bible was written for our learning. 1t is
plain that the learning which he means is
simply and solely that which is related to
religious hope, the Bible was written, St.
Paul says, to teach US religion, to instruct
us in faith and duty. That proposition
would seem evident enough, and would
need no emphasis at all, we're it not that
some people appear to be Of the opinion that
the;Bible in addition to teaching us re-
ligion, is intended to teach us geology,
astronomy and chronology. The people who
hold this view go on to affirm that the Bible
teaches very defective geology, astronomy,
and chronology. And the inference from
that premise is that the Bible is not such a
valuable book as most Christians think it
is. The sehoolmen had convenient phrase
by which to label that sort of reasoning
fdlSus in ur1o, falSuS IN onnibus-mistaken
in one thing, mistaken in everything. The
foolishness of such an argument may ap-
pear more plainly from an illustration.
Suppose you have been reading that singu-
lar autobiography 1.-The Journal of Marie
Bashkirtsef,," and afterward in telling
somebody about it, you happen to make
mis-statement about the price of the book.
In comes this argument, and afirms that
your description from beginning to end is
equally mistaken. You have never read
the book, in the first place, or, granting
covers, the idea which you would give us of
that remarkable record of vanity and intro
spection is wholly beside the point We
will rule your evidence out-because YOU
say that pencil mark in a corner said 81 30
instead OF 81.
ARGUMENTS OF A DECLAIMER.
read in the North American ReUieao that
awell-known declaimer against the Christian
Trrio ir f,,A lo1
more of geology than the author of Genesis;
that Darwin was greater naturalist than
he who told the story of the flood; that
Laplaee was better acquainted with the hab-
its of the sun and moon than Joshua could
have been. As result of this conviction
the declaimer has but a small opinion of the
Bible. The argument is that the Bible was
intended to teach men geology, natural his
tory and the habits of the sun and moon;
and that, proving to be good deal behind
these scientific times In regard to these mat
tiers, it is therefore discredited from Genesis
to Revelation.
1t would, indeed, have been remarkable
II a trained scientific specialist like Laplace
had not known a Thousand times more about
the habits of the sun ana moon than a
sturdy soldier like Joshua. 1t would have
been discouraging. indeed, if in the En-
gland of the nineteenth century after Christ
men had known no more about the world
we live in than was known in Syria in the
fifteenth century before Christ If there
are really any educated Christians to-day
who would think OF disputing these asser-
tlons, then there is some reason for making
them. But they are perfectly selEevident-
there is no need of getting excited about
them. This is what we all believe. In
deed, would go further and affirm that
Frederick Robertson knew more about
religious truth than David or Isaiah. OF
course he did, because he lived
in these days when we have the
word of Christ Himself to teach us
about God. But all this has really no
more connection with the value or authority
OF the Hebrew or the Christian scriptures
than the fact that Prof. Brashear knows
more about telescope lenses than Phillips
Brooks does, has to do with the congrega-
tion of Trinity Church, Boston.
WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN.
Whatsoever things were written aforetime
were written for our learning-for our learn
ing in religious faith and duty. The Bible,
as some old divine said, was written to tell
Us not how the heavens 90, but how to 90 to
heaven. There is no word anywhere in
Holy Scripture where the smallest claim of
infallibiliJy is made for its writers in anv
other matter than their deliverances of the
revelation OF God and their declarations of
His will. 1t might have pleased God to have
made them the messengers of all imaginable
truth. The Bible, like the sacred books of
Egypt, might have comprised an inspired
arithmetic and an inspired grammar
and an inspired geography, and so
on through the list of all possible
text books. It might have pleased GOD so to
have instructed the race that all the latest
Improvements and conveniences should have
adorned the life of Adam and Eve in Eden.
The scientific revelation might have been Civ
en- them once for all. There might have been
a railroad station at Or of the ChaldeeS, and
conversation by telephone between Dan and
Beersheba. That it did not please God so to
do is one OF the things we have to be thank
full fOr. The word discovery, 1.-THE word
Investigation. the word gradual would
have no place In our dictionaries. Half OF
the pleasure of living would have departed
out of human lite. There would have been
no advance, no growth in the world, nothing
to wonder at, to find out, to work for, to look
ahead to.
As matter of fact, God left the messeu-
gers TO whom He gave the revelations of His
will lust the the same soft of men, so far an
ordinary knowledge was concerned, that
they were before He did not remove
one of them g. out of the surround
lnUS, 4lultdNAOueS bhS O6IbCIlNe lQeaS.
the ignorauces of his age. He no more
taught them to think or speak in the Ian
guage of exact science, as we know it to-day,
than He taught them to speak English, |
They would have been nearly as unintelligi-
BILE 10 one case as in the other. There Is every
reason in the world to expect that as com
pared with the knowledge of this day, the
knowledge of Moses will be found deficient
Moses was not professor in an institute of
technology. The truth with which Moses
was interested was religious truth.
THEY WERE LEARNED IN RELIGION.
Whatsoever things were written sforetime
were written for our learning in religion. 1t
matters not at all TO us though mistakes be
found to the number of %, 900 in thescience,
in the geography, in the history of the
writers of the Bible These things are quite
beside the point. They do not concern Us.
They only show what we know already
That God left the men Of the Bible with
their personality untouched, with the limi-
tations of their age about them. They
only emphasize the marvellous way in which
the men Of the Bible exceeded all other men