To be of “an enquiring turn of mind” is both natural and good. It was a quality implanted in unspoiled human nature, for the fact that the fruit of the forbidden tree was to be “desired to make one wise” found a ready response in the heart of Eve.
The first questions recorded in Scripture were put by the Lord God to our first parents, not, of course, for the purpose of gaining information, but to impress upon the disobedient adventurers into the realms of “the knowledge of good and evil” the true nature and result of their ill-gotten information. Their efforts to answer the “discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart” shewed them, as could nothing else, the wretchedness of their condition. Excuses came to their lips, but the workings of conscience turned them into accusations. Out of their own mouths were they condemned. So it is, that through all time, self-questioning, when honestly conducted, has been of the greatest value to the man who is courageous enough to face the truth. It is the surest way of sitting in judgment upon ourselves, and carrying out a true examination of our hearts. “If we would judge ourselves, we should not be judged” (1 Cor. 11, 31). “Let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread and drink of that cup” (1 Cor. 11, 28). A practical test can be made by all who, taking as a basis for the self-questionnaire the Sermon on the Mount, which is an outline of the character of the Master, reading precept by precept, will continually ask the question “Am I like that?”
Self-questioning is the best way of gauging our grasp of any subject, or, as it so frequently works out, of demonstrating the incompleteness of our knowledge, and shewing that our minds are more like broken fishing nets, than retentive vessels. On the other hand, knowledge may exist, but be submerged owing to inability to recollect. In this connection the mind has been likened to sealed bottles; “How,” “When” and “Where” being the “corkscrews” to open them.
Asking questions can degenerate into a mere habit, and a bad one at that ; the mind ever craving new sensations, little effort being made either to ponder upon, or to fix the knowledge received. This flicker-picture mind is characteristic of the times, although by no means confined to the present. The Athenians of Paul’s day, in spite of their philosophy, seem to have fallen into this mischievous habit, for their preoccupation in telling or hearing some new thing seems to have been the outcome of but a shallow, unsettled state of mind, that could hardly distinguish between the Word of Life, and the hundred and one items of daily news which would reach a city where travelers from all parts of the civilised world would foregather. “What news?” they cried. Had it been possible for a modern cinema to have been erected in the suburbs of Athens, there can be little doubt that upon many an occasion the Acropolis would have been almost deserted.
Some four hundred years before Paul’s visit to Mars’ Hill, the Athenians had in their midst another man, Plato, who was rightly esteemed great from the standpoint of human wisdom. In view of the attitude adopted by his successors in philosophy,1 it is of interest to note that he did not exalt man’s wisdom above all, nor was he satisfied that his own reasoning was more than a feeble attempt to solve some of the great problems which presented themselves to his mind he longed for safer guidance.
“It seems to me, Socrates, as to you also, I fancy, that it is very difficult, if not impossible, in this present life to have clear knowledge concerning such subjects ; but that, on the other hand, it is the mark of a faint-hearted spirit to desist from examining all that is said about them in every way, or to abandon the search so long as there is any chance of light anywhere. For on such subjects one ought to secure one of two things, either to learn or discover the truth, or, if this is impossible, at least to get the best of human arguments (words) and the hardest to refute, and relying upon this as on a raft, to sail the perilous sea of life, UNLESS ONE WERE ABLE, MORE SECURELY AND LESS PERILOUSLY, TO MAKE ONE’S JOURNEY UPON A SAFER VESSEL UPON SOME DIVINE WORD.”2
Unlike their great predecessor, the men of Paul’s day were satisfied with human things, with human reasoning that “frail bark” and their seeking after wisdom did not keep some of them from the folly of mocking when they “heard of Jesus and the resurrection,” although it was the invitation, for which Plato had yearned, to embark upon the “safer vessel some divine word” ; yet it is pleasing to recall that others were not such heedless chasers of the day’s news as not to be impressed sufficiently to desire to hear the Apostle again of these matters, while “certain men clave unto him and believed, among whom was Dionysius the Areopagite.”
If our seeking after the wisdom of this world and the facts of natural life discloses gaps in our knowledge which evoke questions, how much more will this be so when we turn our minds to divine things, entering a sphere of thought naturally beyond our ken? The written Word is our greatest possession; much of it is clear that a child may understand, but it has pleased the Revealer of Secrets to conceal from the eye of the vulgar many deep truths which it is our “honour to search out.” In this searching, questions are of great importance. They do not betray an ignorance of which we need be ashamed, but rather indicate growth of understanding.
It may be reasonable to enquire why the Bible needs so much study : that it is Divine is only part of the answer. The Bible is not merely a single book, but many books, a library “Our Sixty-Six Sacred Books” covering a long period during which many far-reaching changes took place among all the nations. Israel itself, perhaps, in some respects, the least changing of people, passed through the varying vicissitudes of being slaves in Egypt, wanderers in the desert, victorious invaders, an oppressed people, occasionally delivered by God through Judges, a powerful and wealthy nation under Saul, David and Solomon, torn by domestic strife and ruthless invaders until both Israel and Judah were carried captives from their land ; Judah was preserved, though afflicted in Babylonia, restored under Cyrus to an unpeaceable re-occupation of their own land ; again oppressed by strangers through the dark period of the Maccabees, during which they were “holpen with a little help,” leading up to the strange conditions prevailing in New Testament times.
From a religious point of view, they had passed through all the stages from splendid faith to abject scepticism ; from rejoicing in their peculiar relationship to the Most High, to changing their God; from carrying out with punctilious exactness the letter of their complicated Law, to erecting abominable altars in the very House which God had chosen to fill with His glory, that they might follow the practices of the heathen. From the Exile they returned with strange notions which have never been eradicated ; although never again did they repudiate their God. In New Testament times they are “in expectation, and musing in their hearts of John, whether he were the Christ, or not,” yet with all the evidences of ocular demonstration before them, so blind were they that they allowed the machinery of their deadly formalities to “kill the Prince of life and desired a murderer in his stead.”
The Acts of the Apostles shews them envious of the success of the Gospel, while some of the Epistles disclose the fact that even among those who had eyes to see the living way, there still remained the scars of their national prejudices, so that they troubled the Church of Christ, trying to introduce heavy burdens which neither they nor their fathers had been able to bear.
These things, together with the working of God with, and for His people, His glorious promises, and gracious invitation to divine sonship ; His fore-shewing of things to come, and continual superintendence of all things toward the predetermined end, make up some of the background of the Old and New Testaments ; for although the New Testament comes to us in a Greek dress, the folds of the garment are not intended, nor are they sufficient, to hide the Hebrew lineaments lying beneath. It may be argued that the New Testament brings us to the glorious fulfilment of the Old ; but it cannot be denied that the Old provides us with the solid structure from which shines forth the glory of the final consummation. Both Old and New stand together ; they are held in bonds which no man may put asunder ; they are inter-explanatory of each other.
Further, the Bible is a translation, and in some parts probably a translation,of a translation ; it was written by inspired orientals for, in the first place, orientals, whose minds would work more quickly and easily upon figures and symbols than do ours.
When the position is fairly faced, it is not surprising that all departments of study can contribute to a better understanding of this Divine Word. A glance at the various articles contributed to The Testimony show our indebtedness to History, Geography, Philology, Archaeology, Zoology, Botany, Physics, Biology, Chemistry, Economics ; and we can well add “etc.,” for it is not to be doubted that any field of legitimate enquiry can fail to have its appropriate value to Bible study ; quite apart from that less-easily definable science of understanding divine things “Theology.”
No one would suggest that the above subjects are necessary to “make us wise unto salvation,” but if, in addition to being “simple believers,” we call ourselves students of God’s Word, we must face the steep gradients up which we must toil to a higher knowledge and appreciation of God, of His ways, and of His purpose.
From the Epistles of the Apostle Paul and the writings of such “Early Fathers” as Origen, it is apparent that the asking of questions was quite a usual procedure in Apostolic days. Origen views the decline of this practice as being one of the evidences of declension. “Several come to church only on solemn festivals ; and then not so much for instruction as diversion. Some go out again as soon as they have heard the lecture, without conferring, or asking the pastors any questions.”3 Obviously they had lost interest, and were so ill-informed as to be unable to detect either beauty or defect in the discourses to which they had listened ; thus were they led astray. Origen’s words might, with great profit, be carefully considered to-day.
Coming to the wholesome words of Paul, we are confronted with sterling advice regarding study and questions :
“Neither give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions, rather than godly edifying which is in faith.” 1 Tim. 1, 4.
“proud, knowing nothing, but doting about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife, railings, evil surmises, perverse disputings of men of corrupt minds, and destitute of the truth.” 1 Tim. 6, 4.
“Foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive ; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing them that oppose themselves.” (2 Tim. 2, 23-4).
Care must be taken in our questions, as in our studies. They must not be for the purpose of shewing hown”clever” we are ; or to put another at a disadvantage ; or to raise “doubtful disputations,” “strifes” or “divisions.” They must be genuine, and in all things uphold our high calling in Christ, who in early life so mastered the art of “both hearing and asking questions” that the Jewish doctors marveled.
We must beware of foolish questions. Questions shew a childlike desire to know, and a childlike disposition in relation to the things of God is good ; but childishness is to be avoided. We must beware that in our aim at an intellectual grasp of divine things, we do not fail of “the grace that is in Christ Jesus” ; for “knowledge puffeth up.” We must beware lest our studies reach only our heads, and not our hearts ; for “knowledge shall vanish away.” The Divine love alone will be permanent.
We have said little of “Answers” ; there is little to say. The field of knowledge is boundless, and in these days it is realised how little one man can really know; hence the tendency to “specialise.” The Testimony fosters this idea, and it is hoped by introducing an Enquiry Section, suitable questions may be dealt with. The Editor’s duty is not himself to answer these questions, but to bring them to the notice of those who by their special studies are best fitted to offer answers, which will be collated and printed for the benefit of all.
Any who by their study of any particular aspect, or portion of the Bible, or who, by being able to bring to bear upon its problems any specialised knowledge are able to assist in this work, are invited to send particulars to the Editorial Secretary, who will arrange for them to be recorded for future reference.
References
- The “Epicureans and Stoics.” however, referred to in Acts 17. v. 18, and against which several parts of Paul’s discourse, in the verses which follow, are directly pointed, were not of the same School as Plato. There were two other sects famous at this time, viz., the Academics, founded by Plato, and the Peripatetics, founded by Aristotle, Neither of these sects appear to have entered into public disputation with the Apostle.
- Quoted from Dr. Gore’s Belief in God, Nash’s edition, p. 36 (our caps). Dr. Gore introduces the ouotation thus : “Our memories are haunted by Plato’s pathetic words, put into the mouth of Simmias in the Phaedo, where the question of the immortality of the soul is under discussion.”
- Quoted in Eureka, vol. 1, p. 441.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One