196 



THE REV. J. E. B. THOMSON, M.A., D.D., ON 



Mr. Sidney Collett said that the arguments and conclusions 

 advanced by Dr. Thomson as to Matthew's account of the Gospel 

 having been written first, did not appeal to him. There seemed 

 to be too much supposition, hypothesis, legend, and tradition relied 

 upon for the argument to carry any weight with him. But that 

 was a small matter. 



The really serious thing that did matter was the way in which 

 the Divine inspiration of the Word of God was ignored, first on 

 page 179, second line, where the lecturer says: "Mark appears to 

 correct mistakes in Matthew " ; and again on page 181 : "Without 

 regarding as perfectly accurate or historic the picture given in the 

 book of Esther." 



Now, if there are " mistakes " in Matthew, and if Esther is 

 " inaccurate " and " unhistoric," then what becomes of the inspira- 

 tion of the Bible as is claimed in such passages as these : "All 

 Scripture is given by inspiration of God " (2 Tim. iii. 16) ; or 

 " Holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost " 

 (2 Peter i. 21) ? ^ 



But, in addition to these, there are numberless instances which 

 prove conclusively the Divine inspiration, and therefore the minute 

 accuracy of the Holy Scriptures. 



Take, for example, Gal iii. 16, where Christ is shewn to be the 

 promised seed by the letter " s " in our authorized translation, i.e.. 

 the difference between the singular and plural of the word " seed " : 

 " He saith not, and to seeds, as of many; but as of one, and to thy 

 seed, which is Christ." 



Mr. W. HosTE said : Dr. Thomson's thought on page 183 that 

 Matthew, in his use of the expression, " Kingdom of Heaven," 

 " follows the reverent practice of the Rabbis in avoiding the undue 

 obtrusion of the Sacred Name," seems suggestive, and valuable as 

 a corrective to certain fanciful distinctions, as they seem to me, 

 drawn by some between this and the other phrase, " Kingdom of 

 God." There is a difference, of course, but it cannot be profound, 

 seeing, for one thing, that the terms are used interchangeably in 

 the same parables, of the mustard seed and leaven, in Matthew xiii. 

 and Luke xiii. The " Kingdom of Heaven " would emphasize the 

 source of the authority, the kingdom of God, the one who exercizes 

 that authority, its sovereign ruler. 



I am afraid I cannot agree with the Chairman, in spite of the 

 glamour of Kenan's name, whom he calls as witness that the object 

 of Matthew throughout is to shew the supersession of Judaism by 

 Christianity. The ministry of our Lord was confined to the lost 

 sheep of the House of Israel, and He warned the twelve not to 

 trespass those limits. It seems to me a gross spiritual anachronism 

 to bring in Christianity into, at any rate, the first 27 chapters of 

 Matthew, except prophetically in chapter xvi., " I will build my 



