shall thereby determine the character of their writings and the au- thority due to them. A prophet, then, in the Scriptural sense of the term, is a spokesman, one who speaks for another, in his name, and by his authority ; so that it is not the spokesman but the person for whom he acts, who is responsible for the truth of what is said. In Exodus vii. 1, it is said, " See, I have made thee a god to Pha- raoh ; and Aaron thy brother shall be thy prophet," i. e., thy spokesman. This is explained by what is said in Exodus ir. 14-16, " Is not Aaron the Levite thy brother ? I know that he
can speak well Thou shalt speak unto him, and put
words into his mouth ; and I will be with thy mouth, and with his mouth, and will teach you what ye shall do. And he shall be thy spokesman unto the people ; and he shall be, even he shall be, to thee instead of a mouth, and thou shalt be to him instead of God." (See Jeremiah xxxvi. 17, 18.) This determines definitely, what a prophet is. He is the mouth of God ; one through whom God speaks to the people ; so that what the prophet says God says. So when a prophet was consecrated, it was said, " Behold, I have put my words in thy mouth." (Jer. i. 9; Is. li. 16.) That this is the Scriptural idea of a prophet is moreover evident from the formu- las, constantly recurring, which relate to his duties and mission. He was the messenger of God ; he spoke in the name of God ; the words, " Thus saith the Lord," were continually in his mouth. " The word of the Lord " is said to have come to this prophet and on that ; " the Spirit came upon," " the power," or " hand " of God was upon him ; all implying that the prophet was the organ of God, that what he said, he said in God's name and by his author- ity. It is true, therefore, as Philo ^ says, Trpot^T^r?;? yap iStov oiSkv
aTTOcfiOeyyeTai aXXorpia Se iravTa VTrrj^ovi'TO'; irepov.
This is precisely what the Apostle Peter teaches when he says (2 Peter i. 20, 21), " No prophecy of the Scripture is of any pri- vate interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man : but holy men spake as they were moved (c^cpd/cci/oi, borne along as a ship by the wind) by the Holy Ghost." Prophecy, i. e., what a prophet said, was not human, but divine. It was not the prophet's own interpretation of the mind and will of God. He spoke as the organ of the Holy Ghost.
What the Prophets said Crod said. 3. It is another decisive proof that the sacred writers were the organs of God in the sense above stated, that whatever they said
- Opera, t. iv. p. 116, ed. Pfeiff.
160 INTRODUCTION. [Ch. VI. — P. JR. of Faith.
the Spirit is declared to have said. Christ himself said that David by the Spirit called the Messiah Lord. (jNIatt. xxii. 43.) David in tlie 95tli Psalm said, " To-day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your heart ; " but the Apostle (Heb. iii. 7), says that these were the words of the Holy Ghost. Again, in ch. x. 15, the same Apostle says, "Whereof the Holy Ghost also is a witness to us: for after that he had said before, This is the covenant that I will .make with them after those days, saith the Lord." Thus quoting the language of Jeremiah xxxi. 33, as the language of the Holy Ghost. In Acts iv. 25, the assembled Apostles said, " with one
accord," " Lord thou art God Who by the mouth of
thy servant David hast said. Why did the heathen rage ? " In Acts xxviii. 25, Paul said to the Jews, " Well spake the Holy Ghost by Esaias the prophet unto our fathers." It is in this way that Christ and his Apostles constantly refer to the Scriptures, showing beyond doubt that they believed and taught, that what the sacred writers said the Holy Ghost said.
Inspiration of the Neto Testament Writers. This proof bears specially, it is true, only on the writings of the Old Testament. But no Christian puts the inspiration of the Old Testament above that of the New. The tendency, and we may even say the evidence, is directly the other way. If the Scriptures of the old economy were given by inspiration of God, much more were those writings which were penned under the dispensation of the Spirit. Besides, the inspiration of the Apostles is proved, (1.) From the fact that Christ promised them the Holy Spirit, who should bring all things to their remembrance, and render them infallible in teaching. It is not you, He said, that speak, but tiie Spirit of my Father speaketh in you. He that heareth you heareth me. He forbade them to enter upon their office as teachers until they were endued with power from on hio-h. (2.) This promise was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, when the Spirit descended upon the Apostles as a mighty rushing wind, and ihey were filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak as the Spirit gave them utterance (^dahat eloqui, as the Vulgate more literally renders the words). From this moment they were new- men, with new views, with new spirit, and with new power and authority. The change was sudden. It was not a development. It was something altogether supernatural ; as when God said, Let there be light, and there was light. Nothing can be more unrea- sonable than to ascribe this sudden transformation of the Apostles