κτίσεως, ἣν ἀνέγραψε Μωσῆς ὁ θεράπων τοῦ θεοῦ διὰ πνεύμaтos Ayiov]. Comp. also Athenag. Leg. c. 7, and c. 9 (where the same figure occurs; ὡσεὶ αὐλητὴς αὐλὸν ἐμπνεύσας). -The views of Irenæus on inspiration were equally strict. and positive, Advers. Hæret. ii. 28: Scripturæ quidem perfectæ sunt quippe a verbo Dei et Spiritu ejus dictæ, and other passages contained in the third book. Tertullian, De Præscript. Hæret. 8, 9; Advers. Marc. iii. 6; De Anima, c. 3 ; Apol. c. 18 (comp. however, § 34).-Clem. Alex. calls the Sacred Scriptures in different places γραφὰς θεοπνεύστας, οι quotes τὸ γὰρ στόμα κυρίου, τὸ ἅγιον πνεῦμα ἐλάλησε ταῦτα, etc. Coh. ad Gr. p. 66, 86; ibid. p. 67, he quotes Jeremiah, and then corrects himself in these words: μᾶλλον δὲ ἐν Iepeμía tò aɣiov πveûμa, etc., and likewise Pæd. i. 7, p. 134: Ο νόμος διὰ Μωσέως ἐδόθη, οὐχὶ ὑπὸ Μωσέως, ἀλλὰ ὑπὸ μὲν τοῦ λόγου, διὰ Μωσέως δὲ τοῦ θεράποντος αὐτοῦ. [Clement, Paed. lib. i. § 6 : Διὰ τοῦτο ἄρα μυστικῶς τὸ ἐν τῷ ̓Αποστόλῳ "Αγιον πνεῦμα, τῇ τοῦ Κυρίου ἀτοχρώμενον φωνῇ, Γάλα ὑμᾶς Tórica (1 Cor. iii. 2), Aéye.] On the infallibility of the inspired writings, see Strom. ii. p. 432, vii. 16, p. 897. Cyprian calls all the books of the Bible divinæ plenitudinis fontes (Advers. Jud. præf. p. 18), and uses in his quotations the same phraseology which Clement employs, De Unit. Eccles. p. 111, De Opere et Eleem. p. 201. [De Op. et Eleem.: Loquitur in Script. Divinis Spiritus Sanctus;" "Item beatus Apostolus Paulus dominicæ inspirationis gratia plenus." De Unit. Eccl.: "Per Apostolum præmonet Spiritus Sanctus et dicit (1 Cor. xi. 19): Oportet et hæreses esse."]

(5) Thus Justin Mart. speaks only of the inspiration of the O. T. with emphatic interest, although he undoubtedly carried over the idea of inspiration to the N. T., see Semisch, ii. s. 12. That he held the evangelists to be inspired, see ibid. s. 22 (against Credner). Comp. Jacobi, ubi supra, s. 57 ff.

(6) The doctrine of inspiration, as set forth in the N. T. writings, stood in close connection with the doctrine of the Holy Spirit and His operations. But they did not think so much of the apostles as writers, as of the power which was communicated to them to teach and to perform miracles. It was only by degrees, and after the writings of the N. T.

had also been collected into one codex (see § 31, 9), that they transferred to the N. T. the idea of inspiration which had been connected with the O. T. Tertullian first makes mention of this Codex as Novum Instrumentum, or (quod magis usui dicere) Novum Testamentum, adv. Marc. iv. 1; and he lays so much stress upon the reception of the entire codex as a criterion of orthodoxy, that he denies the Holy Spirit to all who do not receive Luke's Acts of the Apostles as canonical (De Præscr. Hær. 22). The general terms in which Justin Martyr speaks of the divine inspiration and miraculous power of the apostles, as in Apol. i. c. 39, and of the spiritual gifts of Christians, Dial. cum Tryph. § 88; and the more general, in which he describes the inspiration of the old poets and philosophers (cited in Sonntag, s. 6, 9),-belong to this subject only in a wide sense. Tertullian, however (from his Montanistic standpoint ?), draws a distinction between the two kinds of inspiration, viz. the apostolical, and that which is common to all believers (De Exhort. Castit. c. 4), and represents the latter as only partial; but he does not refer the former kind of inspiration to the mere act of writing. According to Baur's suggestion (Dg. s. 387), it was Tertullian who first introduced the word "Inspiratio" into theological language. But in the writings of Irenæus we find a more definite allusion to the extraordinary assistance of the Holy Spirit in writing the books, with a special reference to the New Testament writers; Adv. Hær. iii. 16, § 2: Potuerat dicere Matthæus : Jesu vero generatio sic erat; sed prævidens Spiritus Sanctus depravatores, et præmuniens contra fraudulentiam eorum per Matthæum ait: Christi autem generatio sic erat. [Comp. Westcott on Gospels, 1860, p. 383 ff.]

(7) Iren. Adv. Hær. iv. 9, p. 237: Non alterum quidem. vetera, alterum vero proferentem nova docuit, sed unum et eundem. Paterfamilias enim Dominus est, qui universæ domui paternæ dominatur, et servis quidem et adhuc indisciplinatis condignam tradens legem; liberis autem et fide justificatis congruentia dans præcepta, et filiis adaperiens suam hæreditatem. . . . Ea autem, quæ de thesauro proferuntur nova et vetera, sine contradictione duo Testamenta dicit: vetus quidem, quod ante fuerat, legislatio; novum autem, quæ secundum Evangelium est conversatio, ostendit, de qua David

ait: Cantate Domino canticum norum, etc. Comp. iii. 11, and other passages. In his fragments (p. 346, Massuct), he compares the two pillars of the house under the ruins of which Samson buried himself and the Philistines, to the two Testaments which overthrew paganism. Yet still Irenæus had an open eye for the human side of the Bible. He wrote an essay upon the peculiarities of the style of Paul, in which, among other things, he explains the syntactic defects in the sentences of the apostle by the velocitas sermonum suorum, which again he connects with the "impetus" of his mind. Comp. Neander, Kirchg. (3d ed.) s. 171. Clem. Alex. Pæd. p. 307: ̓́Αμφω δὲ τὼ νόμω διηκόνουν τῷ λόγῳ εἰς παιδαγωγίαν τῆς ἀνθρωπότητος, ἱ μὲν διὰ Μωσέως, ὁ δὲ δι ̓ ̓Αποστόλων. Comp. Strom. i. 5, p. 331, iii. 10, p. 543. Tertullian also testifies of the Church: Legem et prophetas cum evangelicis et apostolicis litteris miscet et inde potat fidem. De Præscrip. 36.

(8) Orig. De Princip. iv. c. 6, Opp. i. p. 161 : Δεκτέον δὲ, ὅτι τὸ τῶν προφητικῶν λόγων ἔνθεον καὶ τὸ πνευματικὸν τοῦ Μωσέως νόμου ἔλαμψεν ἐπιδημήσαντος Ἰησοῦ. Εναργῆ γὰρ παραδείγματα περὶ τοῦ θεοπνεύστους εἶναι τὰς παλαιὰς γραφὰς πρὸ τῆς ἐπιδημίας τοῦ Χριστοῦ παραστῆσαι οὐ πάνυ δυνατὸν ἦν, ἀλλ ̓ ἡ Ἰησοῦ ἐπιδημία δυναμένους ὑποπτεύεσθαι τὸν νόμον καὶ τοὺς προφήτας ὡς οὐ θεῖα, εἰς τουμφανὲς ἤγαγεν, ὡς οὐρανίῳ χάριτι ἀναγεγραμμένα. From this point of view Origen acknowledges the inspiration of both the Old and the New Testaments, De Princip. procem. c. 8, Opp. i. p. 18, lib. iv. ab init.; Contra Cels. v. 60, Opp. i. p. 623; Hom. in Jerem. Opp. t. iii. p. 282: Sacra volumina spiritus plenitudinem spirant, nihilque est sive in lege, sive in evangelio, sive in apostolo, quod non a plenitudine divinæ majestatis descendat. In the 27th Hom. in Num. Opp. t. ii. p. 365, he further maintains that (because of this inspiration) nothing superfluous could have found its way into the Sacred Scriptures, and that we must seek for divine illumination when we meet with difficulties. Comp. Hom. in Exod. i. 4, Opp. t. ii. p. 131: Ego credens verbis Domini mei Jesu Christi, in lege et Prophetis iota quidem unum aut apicem non puto esse mysteriis vacuum, nec puto aliquid horum transire posse, donec omnia fiant. Philocalia (Cantabrig. 1658), p. 19 : Πρέπει δὲ τὰ ἅγια γράμματα πιστεύειν μηδεμίαν κεραίαν ἔχειν κενὴν σοφίας Θεοῦ·

ὁ γὰρ ἐντειλάμενος ἐμοὶ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ καὶ λέγων· Οὐκ ὀφθήσῃ ἐνώπιόν μου κενός (Ex. xxxiv. 20), πολλῷ πλέον αὐτὸς οὐδὲν Kevòv épeî. Comp. Schnitzer, s. 286. But yet the historical and chronological difficulties attending the attempt to harmonize the Gospels did not escape the critical sagacity of Origen. He acknowledges that, taken verbally, there are insoluble contradictions in the narratives of the evangelists (comp. Hom. x. in Joh. Opp. tom. iv. p. 162 ss.), but comforts himself with the idea that truth does not consist in the σωματικοῖς χαρακτῆρσιν. Thus, for example, he notices the difference in the accounts of the healing of the blind men (Matt. xx. 30 ff.; Mark x. 46 ff.; Luke xviii. 35 ff.). But in order not to concede inexactitude, he takes refuge in strange allegories (comp. Comm. in Matth. Opp. tom. iii. p. 372). Another way of escape in respect to doctrinal difficulties was open to him, in the assumption of a condescension of God, training His people, as a teacher, in conformity with their state of culture at each period (Contra Celsum, iv. 71, tom. i. p. 556). Like Irenæus, Origen also grants that there are inaccuracies and solecisms in the style of the biblical writers (Opp. iv. p. 93), and so, too, different styles of writing in Paul (Ep. ad Rom. x. Opp. iv. p. 678 b). "In general," says Gieseler (Dogmengesch. s. 98), "Origen appears to understand by inspiration, not the pouring in of foreign thoughts, but an exaltation of the powers of the soul, whereby prophets [and apostles] were elevated to the knowledge of the truth; and this view was held fast in the school of Origen." Comp. also the passages there cited, from which it appears that Origen, with all his exaggerated views of inspiration, also admitted that there were uninspired passages in the Scripture, or at least that there were degrees of inspiration, and thus distinguished between its divine and human elements. [The passages are such as 1 Cor. vii. 6, 10, etc. And Gieseler adds, that Origen "did not follow out such hints any farther, but in other passages declared all the Holy Scriptures, including the writings of the apostles, to be unconditionally inspired."] Cf. Baur, Dg. s. 388.

(9) Irenæus compares the Sacred Scriptures to the treasure which was hid in a field, Adv. Hær. iv. 25, 26, and recommends their perusal also to the laity, but under the direction of the presbyters, iv. 32. Clem. Alex. describes their simplicity,

and the beneficial effects which they are calculated to produce, Coh. p. 66 : Γραφαὶ δὲ αἱ θεῖαι καὶ πολιτεῖαι σώφρονες, σύντομοι σωτηρίας ὁδοὶ, γυμναὶ κομμωτικῆς καὶ τῆς ἐκτὸς καλλιφωνίας καὶ στωμυλίας καὶ κολακείας ὑπάρχουσαι ἀνιστῶσιν ἀγχόμενον ὑπὸ κακίας τὸν ἄνθρωπον, ὑπεριδοῦσαι τὸν ὄλισθον τὸν βιωτικὸν, μιᾷ καὶ τῇ αὐτῇ φωνῇ πολλὰ θεραπεύουσαι, ἀποτρέπουσαι μὲν ἡμᾶς τῆς ἐπιζημίου ἀπάτης, προτρέπουσαι δὲ ἐμφανῶς εἰς προΰπτον σωτηρίαν. Comp. ibid. p. 71: Ἱερὰ γὰρ ὡς ἀληθῶς τὰ ἱεραποιοῦντα καὶ θεοποιοῦντα γράμματα κ.τ.λ. Clement did not confine this sanctifying power to the mere letter of Scripture, but thought that the λογικοὶ νόμοι had been written, not only ἐν πλαξὶ λιθίναις, ἀλλ ̓ ἐν καρδίαις ἀνθρώπων (Pæd. iii. p. 307); so that at least the effects produced by the Bible depend upon the susceptibility of the mind. The language of Origen is similar, Contra Cels. vi. 2, p. 630: Φησὶ δ ̓ ὁ θεῖος λόγος, οὐκ αὔταρκες εἶναι τὸ λεγόμενον (κἂν καθ' αὐτὸ ἀληθὲς καὶ πιστικώτατον ᾖ) πρὸς τὸ καθικέσθαι ἀνθρωπίνης ψυχῆς, ἐὰν μὴ καὶ δύναμίς τις θεόθεν δοθῇ τῷ λέγοντι, καὶ χάρις ἐπανθήσῃ τοῖς λεγομένοις, καὶ αὕτη οὐκ ἀθεεὶ ἐγγινομένη τοῖς ἀνυσίμως λέγουσι. De Princip. iv. 6 : ὁ δὲ μετ ̓ ἐπιμελείας καὶ προσοχῆς ἐντυγχάνων τοῖς προφητικοῖς λόγοις, παθὼν ἐξ αὐτοῦ τοῦ ἀναγινώσκειν ἴχνος ἐνθουσιασμοῦ δι ̓ ὧν πάσχει, πεισθήσεται, οὐκ ἀνθρώπων εἶναι συγγράμματα τοὺς πεπιστευμένους θεοῦ λόγους ; so that we hear already of the testimonium Spiritus Sancti. Accordingly, the use of the Scripture was universally recommended by the old Christian teachers, and the apologists call upon the heathen to convince themselves out of the Scriptures of the truth of what was told to them. Comp. Gieseler, Dogmengesch. s. 105 ff. [On the General Use of the Bible : Justin, in his Coh. ad Græc., calls upon the heathen to read the prophetic Scriptures. Athenagoras, in his Apology, assumes that the emperors Marcus Aurelius and his son have the Old Testament. All the Scriptures were read in the public services of Christians: Tertull. Apol. c. 39. Origen against Celsus (vii.) defends the Bible from the charge that it was written in a common style, by the statement that it was written for the common man. Comp. C. W. F. Walch, Kritische Untersuchung vom Gebrauch der heiligen Schritt unter den Christen in den vier ersten Jahrh., Leipz. 1779.]