A Refutation of an Attack on the Bible: The Editor's Column

 •  12 min. read  •  grade level: 9
 
We further learn from God that the reason Cain slew his brother was because his deeds were evil-yes, evil in seeking to approach God as though he were not a guilty sinner. This same evil is inherent in Life's comment on the dialog between men and God. "If Thou, LORD, shouldest mark iniquity, 0 LORD, who shall stand?" Psalm 130:33If thou, Lord, shouldest mark iniquities, O Lord, who shall stand? (Psalm 130:3). "God... commandeth all men everywhere to repent" (Acts 17:3030And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent: (Acts 17:30)). There is no security except by "repentance toward God and faith in our Lord Jesus Christ."
Next comes a daring challenge to the God in whom their breath is: "In this continuing story God seems to develop from one kind of deity to another; but from our later standpoint the human generations to whom he disclosed himself are also seen to have been improving their comprehension of the Eternal." This statement is false in every detail. "In the beginning God" is the same God all the way through-the Creator-the One with whom man has to do. He says in another place, "I am the LORD, I change not" (Mal. 3:66For I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. (Malachi 3:6)). With Him there "is no variableness, neither shadow of turning" (Jas. 1:1717Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning. (James 1:17)). It is a libel on God to even suggest that He changes from one kind of deity to another. But this is current infidelity, which sets aside His sure Word, the Word of Him who cannot lie, and suggests that the whole idea of God just grew up according to the vain delusions of men.
Think of calling the divine record in the prophecy of Isaiah a "most dramatic piece of effrontery in religious history." If God will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain, what will He do with those who mutilate His Word, which He has magnified above all His name. We can say of these leaders, as was said by the Lord of Judas Iscariot, "it had been good for that man if he had not been born." Did not God have a right to send for the Assyrians to chastise His guilty people who had given up "their glory" for them that were no gods? He sent them as "the rod of His anger" in just retribution. Who shall challenge God's right to do so? This boldness is rank effrontery, to say the least. The statement is false that God was preparing the Israelites for "another way than David's to be 'a blessing to mankind.' " Verily, "let God be true, but every man a liar." His word will stand, and great David's greater Son will yet wield the scepter, a righteous scepter, not only over Israel in the coming day, but over a cleansed and subdued earth, man's claims and daring notwithstanding.
Then the old infidelity that came out of Germany during the emergence of higher criticism, so-called, has shown its ugly head in the challenge to the Word of God that there were two different Isaiahs. Was it ingenuity or willful unbelief of the Lord's own words that led these false prophets to imagine two (or maybe more) Isaiahs. The Lord Jesus went into the synagogue in Nazareth on the sabbath and stood up to read; He was given the scroll of Isaiah the prophet and He read from the 61st chapter, saying, "The Spirit of the Lord GOD is upon Me," whereupon He details the present and future purposes of His coming. Did the Lord not know that this was written prophetically by Isaiah? or dare infidel reasoners suggest that He either did not know, or else accepted a common error? These modern unbelievers divide the book of Isaiah at the 40th chapter and attribute the latter part to an unknown Isaiah. But in John 12 we read the emphatic statement: "... yet they believed not on Him: that the saying of Esaias the prophet [not some other man by the same name] might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed?" vv. 37, 38. Then the Spirit of God-the Spirit of truth-added, "Therefore they could not believe, because that Esaias said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them." vv. 39, 40. Let us note it well, that all these verses from Isa. 53:1; 61:1-31Who hath believed our report? and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed? (Isaiah 53:1)
1The Spirit of the Lord God is upon me; because the Lord hath anointed me to preach good tidings unto the meek; he hath sent me to bind up the brokenhearted, to proclaim liberty to the captives, and the opening of the prison to them that are bound; 2To proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord, and the day of vengeance of our God; to comfort all that mourn; 3To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the Lord, that he might be glorified. (Isaiah 61:1‑3)
; and 6:10, though written according to infidel notions by different Isaiahs, are each and all said to be written not only by Isaiah, but by the same prophet. O the shocking incredulity of men who are predisposed to reject the truth! They would not treat the writings of Mohammed, or of any other writer, religious or otherwise, in like manner.
Previously we commented on a sad statement, that God was preparing Israel for another way of blessing for mankind, rather than through David. But little as it may seem, this is a flat rejection of the Lord Jesus as Savior, for He had to come through Abraham and David; not otherwise could He come. Now this article presupposes that the second "pseudo" Isaiah opened another 'way than the way of faith, referring to a suffering servant who would "atone for the sins of the whole human race." This IS nowhere predicated even of the Messiah, for it is unadulterated universalism, that all the human race will be saved, and that, mark you, not dependent on faith in Christ. Universalism is a lie' of the enemy of souls who makes light of the atoning work of Christ on the one hand, and of the eternal demerit for sin on the other.
To accept the statement that "Jesus' contemporaries felt the end of the world was a real possibility, perhaps very close at hand," is to reject Him as God, and to limit the Son of God who knew all things, to the fashion of those who lived at the time. The editors also remark that "the story" of "Jesus' second coming has continued for 1,900 years without a second coming. Instead, it has given believers a hope that sustains them in this life on earth, where the harvest of human accomplishment in history surpasses all that went before. The hope is not dead and the harvest not fully gathered yet." This is a brash setting aside of the hope of His coming, and a setting up the achievements of men (with the best to come) as the hope on earth. Oh, sad indeed if that is all the hope the believer has. God is not glorying in the accomplishments of men. He is waiting until man's wickedness is fully ripe; then He will cut it all down with His sickle. Man is boasting great things as never before. But God's Word says, "The Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with His mighty angels, in flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ." 2 Thess. 1:7, 87And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ: (2 Thessalonians 1:7‑8). The present reminds us of God's sure word concerning judgment to come. Men are saying, "Where is the promise of His coming?" 2 Pet. 3:44And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation. (2 Peter 3:4).
The statement that "Christ made love the supreme commandment" is not true. Before we read that "God is love," we read that "God is light." In Him is no darkness at all. He was the light that manifested man's guilt, but men hated the light and cast Him out of the world. People would rather live on in their sins than come to repentance. So Life's premise is not on solid ground, but on wishful thinking that supposes God will be indifferent to their sins.
On page 15 the editors go back to Genesis 1 to undermine faith in the God of creation. This sublime statement of the facts of God's creatorial power is cast aside for "tradition and myth upon myth." Think of the unholy and profane vaporing of heathens under the influence of demons as a substitute for divine unfoldings of truth. But we read in 2 Timothy, "They shall turn away their ears from the truth, and shall be turned unto fables." This is verily true today, and "men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil."
Think of the audacity which ventures out where angels would not tread, in order to say, "Who this lone writer [of, Genesis 1 and 2] was nobody knows." But we read the unequivocal statement that was made by the Lord of glory: "Have ye not read in the book of Moses...?" Mark 12:2626And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? (Mark 12:26). Of course infidelity does not scruple to reject both Moses and the Lord Himself. In another verse of the same book, Mark, the Lord says that Moses, "For the hardness of your heart... wrote you this precept." If this is not true, then why recognize the Bible at all? Another solid statement regarding Moses and his writings is found in Luke 2426Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into his glory? (Luke 24:26): "And beginning at Moses and all the prophets, He [the Lord Himself] expounded unto them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself." Here again the book of Moses is used to explain those things that Moses wrote of Him. Also in John 5:4646For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me. (John 5:46) is found this conclusive statement: "For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed Me: for he wrote of Me." Not only is what Moses said confirmed, but also what he wrote. This scripture emphasizes the plain fact that these modern writers neither believed Moses, nor Christ. But their rejection is wrapped up in the all-inclusive word "scholars." That word covers a multitude of sins, for it clothes its statements in the air of respectability and seeming authenticity. "Forever, O LORD, Thy word is settled in heaven." Psalm 119:8989LAMED. For ever, O Lord, thy word is settled in heaven. (Psalm 119:89). As far as God is concerned, it is settled on earth also; and the very Word will judge him who rejects it, to his eternal ruin.
These proud, boasted "scholars" have sought to separate the Scriptures into many parts, fancying a variety of authors in order to conjure up a scheme to discredit them. There is nothing but remarkable unity and beauty in the Scriptures, which is unperceived by the natural mind, which is at enmity with God. The Scripture uses the word "Elohim" in some places, and "Jehovah" in others; but in each several place this is done with a perfection in detail. This is thoughtlessly and categorically rejected by would-be "scholars." These latter-day infidels do not hesitate to pronounce on that which is above them, and to imagine a hodge-podge of manuscripts, in some of which they use "J" for Jehovah. They are even so bold as to say, on page 17, that "the place is clearly marked where 'J' picks up the thread." Be it carefully noted that Elohim is used of God as the Creator; but when it comes to the use of Jehovah, it signifies His relationship and man's moral responsibility. We quote here the words of a man of God regarding the charges of many and varied manuscripts: "the wretched incubus complicated cobweb on cobweb, woven by the brains of Teutonic legend mongers, without a single fact." W. K.
Here is another daring bit of presumption: "His [Adam's] expulsion [from Eden] is called the Fall of Man. Yet in one sense it was also the Rise of Man, for his new-found knowledge exalted him far above the other creatures of God's creation." This is plainly the lie which the devil gave to Eve. He suggested that God was withholding something good from them, and held out the bait that they would be as gods and have the knowledge of good and evil. This is now put forward as a big improvement for men. Think of it, to give up communion with God and the blissful condition of an unfallen state for what is now thought of as an advance. The devil hid his sting from. Eve and did not tell her that the conscience they acquired would be a bad one and cause them to flee God's presence. Now in these last days the devil's lie is still preferable.
Could the following statement be classified as other than wickedness? "God seems to have acted as much out of anxiety as anger—a strange state of mind for an omnipotent God." God has magnified His Word above all His name, and. He will avenge the insults to His Word. We hesitate to even quote the bold and unblushing challenge thrown at God, but we are assured that "God is not mocked."
Surely no man with the fear of God in his consciousness would give utterance to the thought that He began with no ultimate plan for man, and that all the way from creation to the days of Abraham, and then add that God at that point, "abruptly took a new tack." Do we not read that, "Known unto God are all His works from the beginning of the world"? Acts 15:1818Known unto God are all his works from the beginning of the world. (Acts 15:18). Nothing ever caught God by surprise and forced Him to change His plans. The thought is preposterous, but it seems worthy of its inventors who will reap the due reward of their deeds.
Are the modern tales about Abraham and his family regarding his God supposed to be amusing? After impugning the "J" writer, they refer to the scriptural accounts as "wonderfully human, funny, and even outrageous." God never intended His sacred Word to be amusing or outrageous. "Far be the thought." He has recorded the doings in life of various men for our instruction. Has it not been written that "these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world [or ages] are come"? 1 Cor. 10:1111Now all these things happened unto them for ensamples: and they are written for our admonition, upon whom the ends of the world are come. (1 Corinthians 10:11). There is a word which modern "scholars" may well heed: "Be wise now therefore, 0 ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the LORD with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest He be angry, and ye perish from the way, when His wrath is kindled but a little." Psalm 2:10-1210Be wise now therefore, O ye kings: be instructed, ye judges of the earth. 11Serve the Lord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. 12Kiss the Son, lest he be angry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a little. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him. (Psalm 2:10‑12).
All of the beauty and wisdom of Joseph's dealings with his brothers when they came down into Egypt to buy corn is lost on those of the natural [unsaved] men to whom the things of the Spirit of God are foolishness (1 Cor. 2:1414But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. (1 Corinthians 2:14)). Joseph, the lovely picture of the Lord Jesus, who was loved by his father and hated by his brothers, is at last exalted; and his brothers have to come before him on bended knee. In this sublime portrait, Joseph is a type of Christ in His future dealings with Israel when they acknowledge their sins. He leads his brothers on step by step into full repentance worthy of Him of whom he is a type.