INSPIRATION. To be inspired in the religious sense of the word is to be stirred and influenced by an outside power, a power which is higher than anything human. To Christians inspiration denotes the direct influence of the divine upon the human mind. To the Jews of old it meant often an audible communication made by God to man; or at least it was represented in this way. The messages which God gave to certain persons in this way were at first proclaimed orally to the people in general by prophets and preachers; they were subsequently com mitted to writing. Afterwards it often happened, where the literary art was sufficiently developed, that a person wrote down at once the message which he believed he was inspired to deliver. In any case, such messages were gathered into books, which came to be regarded as sacred. Nearly every religion has its sacred books. It is claimed for the sacred books of Christianity that they are inspired above all others. It used to be claimed that they were verbally inspired, that is to say, that every word or phrase was, as it were, dictated by God. That claim has, it may be said, been abandoned by the majority of people. Is there such a thing at all as in spiration by an outside power? Do certain books belong to a class by themselves? There are many persons now who assert that the Bible is no more inspired than the Koran, or the Vedas, or the Zend-Avesta, or even than the Essays of Emerson. Now there is no reason to deny that in a measure all these non-Jewish and non-Christian writings are inspired. But there are grounds for think ing that Jewish writings were inspired in a peculiar and unique sense. It is not uncommon to find individuals revealing a gift or genius which is truly marvellous. Shakespeare, even if the groundwork of some of his works is not entirely original, stands in a class by himself. And, although it is not so common, we find also whole nations (or certain nations as a whole) displaying some remarkable gift or genius. The Germans, for instance, have a marvellous genius for music. One need only live amongst them to realize how widespread this gift is. The Jews of old had a peculiar and marvellous genius (or taste, to use a milder term) for religion This stands out clearly in their history. They had this marvellous gift, and the early Christians inherited it. No people has sought God so earnestly or listened so intently for his voice. Just as Germany has produced a Mozart, a Mendelssohn, and a Beethoven, Palestine has given birth to prophets of extraordinary power. And just as in Germany a musical genius of a quite exceptional character might arise, so it might be expected that among the Jews, in other words in the sphere of religion, a Prophet would appear who would reveal God to man in a quite peculiar way. Inspiration, we have said, is claimed for certain books. It may be said, however, that books never can be inspired to the same extent that men are. In moments of inspiration a man comes into communion with a power outside of himself, above himself, with God. He is spoken to by God. God breathes his spirit into him. In what language does God communicate with man? In no human language, it may be said. Spirit communes with spirit. The man has acquired a spiritual power, and is able to impart it, or some of it, to other people (cp. what is said under APOSTOLIC SUCCES SION). The spiritual power of Christianity, and in fact of every religion, is handed on far more by persons than by writings. God does not deliver his message in human language. The prophet, therefore, who wishes to express it in words, spoken or written, has to translate it In terms of human speech. To do this adequately is im possible. It is often said, with a sneer, of someone who claims to have received a divine message that he cannot tell us what it is, and that when he attempts to do so he only succeeds in saying something commonplace. The truth is It Is extremely difficult to give human expression to a divine impression. Inspiration is a very real experience. In earlier times, when prophets lived in closer contact with nature and in more intimate com munion with God, the experience known as inspiration seems to have been more frequent and to some extent bettei understood. The references to it in the Christian Bible are well known. There are other references which are not so familiar. Though, as Prof. Sanday says,
Philo (c. 20 B.C.-45 A.D.) " lays stress rather on the in spired person than on the inspired book," he speaks of " sacred scriptures " (hierai graphai), sacred books" (hierai bibloi), sacred word" (ho hieros logos), of " oracles" (chresmoi), etc. Philo clearly regarded every word of the Scripture text as sacred. If it did not give a suitable meaning when translated literally, it had to be explained allegorically. According to Philo, Jeremiah spoke " in the person of God Himself " (ek prosopou ton Theou). He claims that there is " nothing superfluous " in the Law. It is clear, moreover, that "he regarded the Greek translation as itself a product of divine in spiration as much as the original. He is the first to add to the story of Aristeas—which made the Seventy trans lators produce a harmonious text by comparing their versions together—the further touch that this harmony was obtained, not by comparison of results, but by super natural aid : the translators, according to him, were inspired prophets who ' did not produce one one rendering and another another, but all the same words and expres sions as though some invisible prompter were at the ear of each of them' " (Sanday). Philo regards all good men as inspired (c.o., Plato, the "most sacred": Herac litus, the "great and renowned "; Parmenides, Duped ocles, Zeno, Cleanthes), and he had had personal experience of inspiration himself. Yet he " never quotes as authoritative any but the Canonical Books," and " it is clear that he attributes to them an authority which is really unique in its kind." To turn to another writer, Josephus (A.D. 37-38 to about A.D. 110), who represents the views of the Pharisees in Palestine during the second half of the first century A.D. Josephus speaks of " sacred books " (hierai Bibloi), " sacred writings " (hiera grammata), "books of sacred scriptures " (hieron graphon Bibloi), etc. Josephns " speaks of ` the Deity (To enov) being present with' a writer; of ' holding eon verse with God ': of being possessed or inspired by God '; of ' being filled with Deity ' : of ' being in a state of Divine inspiration '; of the Spirit of God taking bold of ' the prophet; of the Divine gift passing over' from one person to another. Josephus is almost as explicit as Philo in regard to the manner of inspiration. He describes Balaam as prophesying ' not as master of him self but moved to say what he did by the Divine Spirit' " (Sanday). He speaks of the Jewish Scriptures as the "decrees of God " (Theou dogmata). Every Jew from the day of his birth recognises them to be such by instinct, and is prepared "cheerfully to lay down his life in their behalf." In these writings " not a soul has ventured either to add, or to remove, or to alter a syllable" (Josephus, Contra Apionem, I. 8). And they do not disagree and conflict with one another. Such writers as Philo and Josephus would seem to have re garded all the books of the Jewish Canon as equally inspired. Some of the Jewish scholars, however, holding the theory of the Synagogue that the whole Canon was fixed at one time, and on this assumption finding it difficult to explain the position of some of the books (e.g., Daniel) among the Hagiographa (q.v.), argued that there was a difference in inspiration. This was the line taken by Moses Maimonides (A.D. 1135-1204), David Kimehi (died A.D. 1240). and Abarbanel (born A.D. 1437). They supposed that the second group of books, the Prophets, were inspired by the " spirit of prophecy," the third group of books, the Hagiographa. by " the holy spirit." The Torah was revealed, peh 'el peh, the Nebiim (Prophets) by the roach ha-nebuah, and the Kethubim (Hagiographa) by the roach ha-kodesh. The theory, how ever, as G. Wildeboer points out (Canon of the O.T., 1895) was peculiar to these later Jewish scholars. It finds no support in the New Testament or even in the Talmud. We have already suggested that in a so-called inspired book there must be a human element, inasmuch as it is difficult for a writer to give expression in human language to a divine impression. When the Swiss or Helvetic Consensus Formula (A.D. 1675) taught the literal inspiration of Holy Scripture, it took up an impossible position. A standard work on the subject Is W. Sanday's Inspiration, 1903 (" Banipton Lectures," 1893).