‘art. CHURCH in vol. i.) it was believed that
Apostles and Prophets possessed an authoritative inspiration. The Apostles had seen the Lord, and were witnesses to the Resurrection (Lk 2448, Ac 18 22 282, 1 Co 91). They showed the signs of an Apostle (1 Co 92, 2 Co 12"), and they had received a call from God (1 Co 12%, Eph 4"). They were endowed as well as the Prophets with that higher energy of the Spirit which qualified them for special revelations (see articles APOSTLE in vol. i. and PROPHET IN NT in vol. iv.). Most instructive in this respect are the writings of St. Paul, as to defend the truth of his gospel it was needful for him to establish his claims as an Apostle. He asserts his independence of human instruction and his reception of his gospel by Divine revelation (Gal 1"-*4), In his own instructions to the Churches which he had founded he distinguishes between the commandments of the Lord and his own judg- ment (1 Co 7 *), but expresses the confidence that even in the exercise of this he has the Spirit of God. He testifies that, in a state of ecstasy, he was transported to the third heaven and heard unspeakable words, unlawful to utter (2 Co 12-3), Not only did Jesus appear to him on the way to
‘Damascus (Ac 927, 1 Co 158), but on other occasions
also did He come and speak to him in trance or vision (Ac 18° 2217 2616), At Troas he was guided to cross to Macedonia by a vision in the night (Ac 16°). The angel of God conveyed an assurance of safety to him (Ac 27%), St. Peter, too, was taught his duty towards the Gentiles in a vision during a trance (Ac 10”). An angel appeared to Mary in a vision (Lk 1°°8), and to Joseph in a dream (Mt 1-23), The visions in the Book of Revelation may be, as is common in Apocalyptic literature, a literary device, but there may have been some basis for them in unusual psychic conditions. Of such mental states as trance, vision, dream as organs of revelation, we must beware of judging by our modern standards. For us such means of Divine communication may seem less credible than inward intuition, but even to a St. Paul these methods of revelation seemed significant and valuable. (The articles on DREAM in vol. i. and TRANCE and VISION in vol. iv. may with ad- vantage be consulted). In closing this section of the article a few general considerations may be offered. The Prophet, or Apostle, or even Christ Himself, is confident that God is revealing His mind and will to him, but distinguishes God’s words from his own. With the Prophet, it would seem, the inspiration was not constant ; his whole personality did not become the permanent organ of the Spirit. In the Apostle the spiritual posses- sion is more constant and complete. He may still distinguish his own opinions from his Lord’s com- mands, but his inspiration is derived from an intimate personal union and communion with the living Christ Himself. As the natural life has been more completely transformed by the super- natural, their contrast is less evident than in the prophetic consciousness. In Christ the union of
REVELATION
REVELATION 335
God and man is so complete, that, so to speak, the absolute quantity of the inspiration guarantees the perfect quality of the revelation. There is, therefore, no uniformity in the intensity of the inspiration or the sufficiency of the revelation in the Holy Scriptures; but we must distinguish degrees of the one as we recognize varieties of the other. In the OT the prophetic consciousness exhibits revelation at its highest; the spirit of devotion as expressed in the Psalms may be reckoned nearest to this; then we may perhaps place the meditations in the Wisdom literature on the laa of life and duty; and, lastly, come the historical records, inspired in so far as they regard the history as the development of God’s purpose and the fulfilment of His promises. The Apostolic interpretation varies in the fulness of the understanding of the mind of Christ, dependent on the closeness of the fellowship with the life of Christ, in whom revelation and inspiration alike culminate. The OT increases as a revelation as it approaches Him, and the NT varies as a revelation as 1t receives more or less of His Spirit.
iv. THE EvIDENCE or REVELATION.—1l. Evi- dence of the Bearers of Revelation.—The first line of evidence is to be found in what has just been mentioned at the close of the previous section—the consciousness of the bearers of the revelation. They bear witness that they are not speaking of themselves, but that God is communicating to them what they are declaring to others. The truth of the reality of the revelation, and the sincerity of its organs,—these two are not the same, for a man professing to communicate a revelation might be a deceiver or self-deceived,— cannot be proved by any outward attestation, but only by the moral and spiritual quality of the revelation, and by the personal character it forms in the bearer. The fulfilment of prophecy is not, unless in exceptional circumstances, a test that can be immediately applied, and the performance of miracles does not afford a decisive criterion, as the natural may be made to appear as_super- natural. But these two evidences are quite out of court for us. For, where the character of the bearer and the content of the revelation do not inspire confidence, denial that any real prediction has been made, or any actual miracle has taken place, cannot be disproved. If at one time pro- phecy and miracle were relied on as attesting a revelation, such an argument is worthless at the present day. For, on the one hand, the more critical attitude towards the records of revelation which is becoming more general forbids that un-