32 



REV. G. F. WHIDBOENE, M.A., F.G.S._, ON 



has no other possible source than inspiration. And if it l^e false, 

 seeing what it is, how is it to be accounted for ? Is it a strncrure 

 which it is conceivaWe to have been built up by a series of 

 impostors ? The dilemma is here again ; the authors cf the # 

 Bible professed to have received its religion from God, and 

 therefore unless that was an actual fact, they were nothing else 

 than conscious, or unconscious, impostors. Now it may be said 

 that the innumerable correspondences in the Bible render the 

 idea of its being an unconscious imposture impossible. 

 Passages from its different books could not have been woven 

 together, in the way in which they are woven together, without 

 definite intention : and if this were not done by the intention 

 of God, it must have been done by the intention of man ; that 

 is, if there were imposture, it must certainly have been 

 intentional imposture. Hence we are reduced to the question — 

 could the religion of the Bible be regarded as an intentional 

 imposture ? Its nature, its scope, its origin, its structure must 

 be examined on that hypothesis. If it was an imposture, what 

 was its purpose ? What good was it to do ? Certainly it 

 brought no temporal benefits to its authors ; their earthly 

 position was not improved by their writings, often the reverse. 

 'Not could its object have been to bring good to those to whom 

 it was written, seeing that its authors knew it to be a fraud. 

 So, unless the Bible was inspired, its religion was built up 

 without purpose. And the effect it has had upon mankind is 

 the accidental effect of a fraud. That effect has only to be 

 measured to prove the absurdity of such a supposition. 

 Consequently it is evident that the rehgion set forth by the 

 Bible, is in itself a proof of its inspiration. 



(6) Most of all it is to be observed that there exists, over and 

 above all else, a direct proof of the inspiration of Scripture 

 following on a personal knowledge of Christ. This proof is of 

 course only available to those who are convinced Christians. 

 To all others, the premises are unknown ; and therefore the 

 consequent result cannot be demanded. But even as the 

 want of the knowledge of Greek in some renders the Iliad a 

 closed book to them, but does not debar those who do know 

 Greek from understanding the Iliad ; so the absence of a 

 personal knowledge of the Lord Jesus Christ in some does not 

 lessen the value of His authority to those who do personally 

 know Him. So this proof must be stated for the sake of those 

 to whom it is available ; all others must stand by and only 

 judge its weight, by what they see in those whom it affects. 

 Now it is alleged by no inconsiderable number of mankind that 



