There are still problems and questions to be answered in both the Old and New Testament. Though small in number, there still exist apparent contradictions and confusing chronologies. One cannot read the synoptic Gospels without becoming aware of the fact that there is an insufficiency of data to solve some of the problems which are raised by literary and textual criticism. We must not forget, however, that insufficiency of data does not at all logically postulate the existence of error. Rather, as we now know, what one hundred years ago was considered to be error by some liberal scholars is today regarded as factual data by even the most liberal Biblical scholars.

     The testimony of archeologists of the caliber of the late William F. Albright, Nelson Glueck, Cyrus Gordon, and Yigai Yadin cannot be ignored in any fair evaluation of Biblical accuracy and reliability. The evidence is in favor of the historic position of the church. When God speaks, there is no "indistinct sound" (1 Corinthians 14:8 NASB) - the Author of the ages does not stutter. ". . . THOU HAST MAGNIFIED THY WORD ABOVE ALL THY NAME. . . THE WORD OF GOD. . . LIVETH AND ABIDETH FOREVER." (Psalm 138:2 1 Peter 1:23)

     The words of the great scholar Bishop E. H. Bickersteth sum up the ancient and defensible position of historic Christianity concerning the Bible. We would do well to listen prayerfully to his wisdom and believe in the truth he champions so well:

     In its sacred characters God speaks, and man speaks. Who can lay bare the mystery? Who can dissect the mingled shadings of the colours of the rainbow? But this inspiration of Scripture, though perfectly consistent with the individuality of the several writers, is altogether inconsistent with those rationalistic theories which subvert the faith of some in the present day. It absolutely refuses to allow the existence of anything false, or fallible, or merely human in the Scriptures as first given by God to man. Then should we need yet another revelation to assure us what was inspired and what uninspired, what was fallible and what infallible, what was human and what Divine. Further, it positively resists the theory of human reason, or any verifying faculty in man, being the ultimate judge of God’s revelation. "For the prerogative of God," says Bacon, "extendeth as well to the reason as to the will of man; so that, we are to obey His law, though we find a reluctation in our will. So are we to believe His words, though we find a reluctation in our reason. For if we believe only what is agreeable to our sense, we give consent in the matter, not to the Author, which is no more than we do to a suspected and discredited witness. Nor ought we to draw down or submit the mysteries of God to our reason, but, contrariwise, to raise and advance our reason to the Divine truth.

     The obedience of faith does not in the very least interfere with the useful and important duty of critical investigation. Though, in better words than my own, "Let us always be cautious that we do not extend criticism beyond its limits. To investigate the merits of copies and versions, to lead us up by a careful process of inquiry to the very text, as near as may be, as it was penned by the various authors, to illustrate what they have said, and to facilitate the understanding of their words - this is the object, this the ample field of sacred criticism. But an awful responsibility is incurred if we elevate it into the judge of prophets and apostles, to censure them for what they have said, and to pronounce what they should have said; to declare their reasoning inconclusive, and their statements inaccurate; to regard them as led astray with false philosophy, and bewildered for want of recollection; to thrust them, in fact, far below a shrewd professor in a German university, who could have taught the world more skillfully than they did - from this the devout mind should intuitively shrink. We are commanded indeed to prove all things; we are encouraged by the book itself to search whether the things it tells us be so. But surely the authenticity and general truthfulness of the record being established, its own testimony is sufficient to indicate its highest claims."

     These claims -to sum up what I have said before - are nothing less than the plenary inspiration of Scripture, from Genesis to Malachi, from Matthew to Revelation. Every jot and tittle of the Bible, as originally penned by the sacred writers, is God’s WORD WRITTEN - I repeat, as originally penned, for the truth here affirmed does not ask us to believe in the inspiration of copyists or translators or interpreters. Superficial errors, though we believe them to be few and comparatively unimportant, may have crept in during the lapse of ages. But the autographs were perfect. They may record the ungodly sayings and sentiments of ungodly men, but those sayings are historically true, and it was the mind of the Spirit thus to record them. They may embody earlier uninspired documents; but, if it be so, the fact of the Holy Ghost moving the sacred writers to embody them proves that every word is true, and stamps every sentence thus taken into the canon of Scripture with the seal of God. They do in their various parts bear the unmistakable impress of the individual character of every author (for inspiration is not of necessity dictation), but each one spake as he was moved by the Holy Ghost. So the one inspiring breath of the pipe organ gives forth the sound, which the conformation of every pipe impresses on it. It is God speaking to man in man’s language. And as the Incarnate Word was subject to the innocent infirmities of humanity, though absolutely and perfectly without sin, so the written Word is the mind of God, couched in the feeble symbolism of human speech, but yet is pure, perfect, and infallible. This glorious possession - this choicest heirloom of the family of man - we owe to the inspiration of the Holy Ghost.