Service which will last when our man-made contrivances have crumbled into dust and are forgotten on the sands of time.

T

The Old Testament Why

BY THE REV. FRANCIS J. HALL, D.D.

HE Rev. Mr. Caswell is a most interesting writer; but his article in the December issue on Why the Old Testament? reminds me that the most harmless lamb can be dressed up to look alarmingly like a lion. After a second and close reading of his article, I am convinced that its title is only a lion's skin, and that its roar need not be feared, is not hostile to even the most orthodox lambs.

He attacks present methods of using the Old Testament— especially in our Sunday Schools, and in the lectionary-and I agree with him that these methods are pretty bad. But his title, Why the Old Testament? suggests the possibility that he would like to abolish that part of Scripture, although I have no doubt that he is as convinced as I am that it is an integral part of the Word of God. Then, too, the destructive aspects of his argument are pushed to the front in a manner that draws the reader's attention away from the delicate hints which he gives in passing that after all he realizes the value of the Old Testament when rightly used. Why did he scare us, when he meant only to edify us!

Further on in this article I hope to say something about popular teaching of the Old Testament and its use in the lectionary. But my present aim is to explain as simply and clearly as I can the Christian place and value of the Old Testament. Unless we understand this, we cannot hope to deal sanely with problems of method in teaching and using it.

I. What the Bible Is.

The Bible is a very miscellaneous library of books or documents, written at different periods in the progress of God's

people; and each document shows clear traces of the stage of general knowledge and spiritual enlightenment which God's Church had reached, or was reaching, when it was written. But the process of the Bible's making-including the selection of its several parts, their being edited, and their being brought into one collection of sacred writings for the Church's permanent use this whole process was dominated by the Holy Spirit.

For this reason, and because God has put the resulting library into His Church's hands for one definite purpose, we rightly treat it as making one Bible, having divine meaning throughout, and we rightly call it the Word of God. God is its principal Author, not in the sense that each sacred passage taken by itself represents a "Thus saith the Lord," but in this sense, that God has at least put each passage into His Bible for Christians. All parts of Scripture, therefore, in their biblical context and connections, minister to the edifying purpose for which God gave the Bible to us.

II. Mistakes as to Its Purpose.

We need most clearly to realize the nature and limits of this purpose, if we would learn how rightly to use the Bible. Three mistakes about it have widely prevailed, and are by no means wholly removed today. And they go far to explain the misuses of the Old Testament which have called forth Mr. Caswell's criticism-justifiable, even if not sufficiently guarded.

(a) It is a serious mistake, for example, to think that the Bible is given to us for infallible guidance in the secular subjects to which its writers refer, whether historical or scientific. Careful study convinces every unbiased student that the Bible, especially the Old Testament, cannot safely be used in that way. And the fact that those who do thus use it find themselves at hopeless issue with important things that intelligent men have learned concerning nature and ancient history proves that we must either correct such a view of God's purpose or surrender

our belief that the Bible is His Word. The facts show clearly that when Bible writers dealt with scientific and historical matters, the Holy Spirit left them to deal with these subjects in the light of the knowledge and traditions of their respective times. The divine or biblical meaning of what they wrote lies deeper than this human element or context.

(b) A second mistake, also very serious, is to treat Holy Scripture as equally serviceable in all its parts for information concerning divine truth, and for proof of the doctrinal and moral elements of the Christian system. Any one can satisfy himself by examining the Bible that its various parts belong to different stages in God's education of His people, and that they preserve not only the truths which God had imparted, or was imparting, at each stage, but also the unenlightened ideas and ideals which the chosen people still retained. The facts show that it was not God's method to teach all His truth, and to correct all errors, at once. The limited receptive capacity of men required "here a little and there a little," much long-suffering with the ignorance even of the prophets, and a progressive education, not reaching the Christian level until New Testament days.

The facts-and we must reckon with them-show that the Bible does not simply record the succession of spiritual lessons given to Israel. It embodies these lessons in inferior contexts, contexts that reveal to us the conditions under which Israel's education had to be promoted by God. And it requires much care and Christian discrimination to distinguish in the Old Testament between its divine teaching and the very human context in which God has willed that it should be preserved for our study.

We must take the Bible as we find it, rather than trust to preconceived ideas as to what God's Word must be like. But what we find in the Old Testament, when we reflect reasonably on it, should not make us doubtful as to its place in the Word of God. The inferior context can be seen to be practically in

dispensable, if we are to gain an intelligent idea of God's patient method of building up His Kingdom and of enlightening His Church. And that we should gain this is surely a credible explanation why God has included the whole Old Testament in the Bible.

(c) A third mistake is the notion that the Bible is the source from which the Church gets her doctrine. There are two very plain reasons for denying this. In the first place, the Church was teaching her faith before the definitive part of Scripture, the New Testament, had begun to be written. In the second place, those who treat the Bible as the source of Christian doctrine, viz., Protestants, and build up their faith exclusively upon that basis, utterly fail to agree, even in vital particulars, as to what true Christian doctrines are. The Bible is not written systematically for the definition of saving doctrine, but is a very miscellaneous literature, determined in form by particular practical emergencies in the Church's life. The Church is the proper definer of saving truth, and those who loyally seek her mind are found everywhere to agree in the fundamental articles of the Christian faith. This fact is very significant, especially in view of the schisms that have made agreement increasingly difficult.

III. The Real Purpose of the Bible.

It is time to come to positive definition. What general definition, then, are we justified in giving to God's purpose in providing His Church with the Bible, including the Old Testament? St. Paul answers this question with sufficient clearness. Of "the sacred writings" he says-and he refers to the Old Testament, of course, for the New Testament had not been writtenthat they "are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus," and that they serve to make "the man of God" "complete, furnished completely unto every good work" (2 Tim. iii. 15-17). In other words their value and purpose is to impart saving wisdom to those who accept the

faith which is in Christ Jesus, and to complete their equipment for good works. Such a purpose is exclusively Christian, and one that presupposes knowledge and acceptance of the Christian faith. That the Bible was given of God for this purpose is St. Paul's "Old Testament Why," and it should be that of every Christian believer. It determines fundamentally how Christians should use the Old Testament, and how it should be taught to our children and read in our Churches.

We may not shelve the Old Testament Scriptures, for God gave them to us and, as St. Paul says, they are "for our learning, that through . comfort of the Scriptures we might have hope" (Rom. xv. 4). How then shall we use them? In the first place, with a view to enlarging our hold on the faith which is in Christ Jesus-the faith which was revealed in New Testament days and committed to the Church to teach and define. In the second place, and on the basis of Christian doctrine, in such wise as to gain spiritual edification in the way of eternal life and in Christian virtues. This means, in brief, that we must read and study the Old Testament with Christian discrimination, distinguishing in it that which points forward to Christ and His Kingdom from that which is the historic context rather than the substance of its sacred teaching.

As Christ made clear to two of His disciples (St. Luke xxiv. 27), all the Old Testament Scriptures contain things concerning Himself. No doubt their reference to Him is often very indirect; but there are threads running through the whole which, when once identified, enable us to see in the Old Testament a great hand the index finger of which points straight to Christ. Its sacred history is that of the Church of Christ in the preparatory stage, and describes the gradual development in this Church of the messianic hope. Its ritual is surcharged with Christian symbolism. Its narratives exhibit many types of Christ and His Kingdom, and many of the stories that are used in our Sunday Schools merely to illustrate moral lessons, are dramatic foreshadowings of what Christ was to suffer and do. The story of Joseph is a good example. To one