Incarnation – Instant

Incarnation

It is a distinguishing feature of Christianity that it consists in faith in a person, Jesus Christ, and in faith or self -committal of such a character that faith in Him is understood to be faith in God. The fact on which the whole of the Christian religion depends is therefore the fact that Jesus Christ is both God and man. Assuming provisionally this fact to be true, or at least credible, this article will briefly examine the witness borne to it in the books of the OT and NT.

1. The Incarnation foreshadowed in the OT. — Early religions have attempted to explain two things — the existence and order of the universe, and the principles of conduct or morality. The Hebrews attained at an early period to a belief in God as the creator and sustainer of the universe, but their interest in metaphysic did not go beyond this. It is in their moral idea of God that we shall find anticipations of the Incarnation, (a) The OT conception of man. Man is made in the image of God (Genesis 1 9:6). Whatever may be the exact meaning of this expression, it appears to imply that man has a free and rational personality, and is destined for union with God. (5) Ood reveals Himself to man, A belief in the self-manifestation of God, through visions, dreams, the ministry of angels, the spirit of prophecy, and in the possibility of personal converse between God and man, is apparent upon every page of the OT. The ‘theophanies’ further suggest the possibility of the appearance of God in a human form. It is also remarkable that, although’ the sense of the holiness and transcendency of God grew with time, the Jews in the later periods did not shrink from strongly anthropomorphic expressions, (c) Intimations of relationships in the Deity. Without unduly pressing such particular points as the plural form of Elohim (God), or the triple repetition of the Divine name (Isaiah 6:3. Numbers 6:23). it may at least be said that the idea of God in Jewish monotheism is not a bare unit, and ‘can only be apprehended as that which involves diversity as well as unity.’ Moreover, the doctrine of the Divine Wisdom as set forth in the Books of Proverbs and Wisdom (Proverbs 8:22, Wisdom 7 8:1 etc.) personifies Wisdom almost to the point of ascribing to it separate existence. The doctrine was carried further by Philo, with assistance from Greek thought, and prepared the way for St. John’s conception of the Logos, the Word of God. (.d) The Messianic hope. This was at its root an anticipation of the union of Divine and human attributes in a single personality (see Messiah). It developed along several distinct lines of thought and expectation, and it will be noted that these are not combined in the OT; but Christianity claims to supply the explanation and fulfilment of them all.

2. The fact of the Incarnation in the NT. — (a) The humanity of Christ. It is beyond dispute that Christ is represented in the NT as a man. He was born, indeed, under miraculous conditions, but of a human mother. Hebrews 5 up with gradually developing powers (Luke 2:52). The people among whom He lived for thirty years do not appear to have recognized anything extraordinary in Him (Matthew 13). During the period of His life about which detailed information has been recorded, we read of ordinary physical and moral characteristics. He suffered weariness (Mark 4:38. John 4:6), hunger (Matthew 4:2). thirst (John 19:28) he died and was buried. He felt even strong emotions: wonder (Mark 6:6, Luke 7:9). compassion (Mark 8:2, Luke 7:13). joy (Luke 10:21). anger (Mark 8:12 10:14) He was deeply moved (John 11:33. Mark 14:33). He acquired information in the ordinary way (Mark 6:38 9:21, John 11:34). He was tempted (Matthew 4:1–11, Luke 22:28). And it may be further asserted with the utmost confidence, that neither in the Gospels norinanyother part of the N’T is there the smallest support for a Docetic explanation of these facts (that is, for the theory that He only seemed to undergo the experiences narrated). (6) The Divinity of Christ. Side by side with this picture of perfect humanity there is an ever-present belief through all the NT writings that Christ was more than a man. From the evidential point of view the most important and unquestionable testimony to the early belief of His disciples is contained in St. Paul’s Epistles, especially those to the Romans, Galatians, and Corinthians, which are among the earliest books of the NT, and of the most undisputed genuineness. In these Epistles we find Jesus Christ ‘co-ordinated with God in the necessarily Divine functions, in a manner impossible to the mind of a Jewish monotheist like St. Paul, unless the co-ordinated person is really believed to belong to the properly Divine being.’ In the Gospels we have an account of how this belief arose. The Synoptic Gospels supply a simple narrative of fact in which we can mark the growing belief of the disciples; and the Fourth Gospel definitely marks stages of faith on the part of Christ’s adherents, and of hatred on the part of His enemies. The following points may be specially noted in the Gospels: —

(1) Extraordinary characteristics are constantly ascribed to Christ, not in themselves necessarily Divine, but certainly such as to distinguish Christ in a marked degree from other men. There is a personal Influence of a very remarkable kind. This is naturally not described or dwelt upon, but every page of the Gospels testifies to its existence. The earliest record of Christ’s life is pre-eminently miraculous. In spite of economy and restraint of power, mighty works are represented as having been the natural, sometimes the almost involuntary, accompaniments of His ministrations. Two special miracles, the Resurrection and the Virgin-birth, are noticed separately below. He spoke with authority (Mark 7:29). He claimed to fulfil the Law — a law recognized as Divine — to be Lord of the Sabbath, and to give a new law to His disciples. In all His teaching there is an implicit claim to infallibility. In spite of His being subject to temptation, the possibility of moral failure is never entertained. There is nothing that marks Christ off from other men more than this. In all other good men the sense of sin becomes more acute with increasing holiness. In Christ it did not exist. The title of ‘Son of Man’ which He habitually used may have more meanings than one. But comparing the different connexions in which it is used, we can hardly escape the conclusion that Christ identifies Himself with the consummation and perfection of humanity.

(2) He claimed to be the Messiah, summing up and uniting the different lines of expectation alluded to above. As has been pointed out, the Messianic hope included features both human and Divine; and although this was not recognized beforehand, it appears to us, looking back, that these expectations could not have been adequately satisfied except by the Incarnation.

(3) Of some of the things mentioned above it might be a sufficient explanation to say, that Christ was a man endowed with exceptional powers and graces by God, and approved by mighty wonders and signs. But even in the Synoptic Gospels, which are for the most part pure narrative, there is more than this. In the claim to forgive sins (Matthew 9:2–6), to judge the world (Mark 14:62, 63), to reveal the will of the Father (Matthew 11:27), in His commission to the Church (Matthew 28:18–20, nk 16:15–18, Luke 24:44–48), and above all, perhaps, in the claim of personal adhesion which Hebrews 9 made on His disciples. He assumes a relationship to God which would not be possible to one who was not conscious of being more than man.

(4) In the discourses in the Fourth Gospel, Christ plainly asserts His own pre-existence and His own essential relation to the Father. If these discourses represent even the substance of a side of Christ’s teaching (a point which must be assumed and not argued here). He explicitly bore,vritness_to His eternal relation to the Father.

(5) What crowned the faith of the disciples was the fact of the Resurrection. Their absolute belief in the reality of this fact swept away all doubts and misgivings. At first, no doubt, they were so much absorbed in the fact itself that they did not at once reason out all that it meant to their beliefs; and in teaching they had to adapt their message to the capacities of their hearers; but there can be no question about the place which the belief in the Resurrection took in determining their creed (see jEstrs Christ, p. 458°).

(6) One miracle recorded in the Gospels, the Virgin-birth, naturally did not form part of the first cycle of Apostolic teaching. The Apostles bore witness to their own experience and to the growth of their own faith, and they knew Jesus Christ first as a man. Apart from the evidence for the fact, it has seemed to most Christians in all ages that the idea of a new creative act is naturally associated with the occurrence of the Incarnation.

3. Purpose and results of the Incarnation.— (a) Con^ summation of the universe and of humanity. — St. Paul (Ephesians 1:10) speaks of the purpose of God ‘to sum up all things in Christ, the things in the heavens and the things upon the earth’ (cf. Hebrews 2:10). This is a view which is not often explicitly dwelt upon in the Scriptures, but the idea appears to pervade the NT, and it is conspicuous in Eph., Col., and Hebrews. Christ is represented as fulfilling the purpose of humanity and therefore of the universe, as being its first and final cause, ‘for whom are all things, and through whom are all things.’ It is hardly necessary to point out that the modern teaching of evolution, if not anticipated by Christianity, at least adapts itself singularly well to the expression of this aspect of it.

(6) Supreme revelation of God. — Christians have always believed that even the material universe was destined ultimately to reveal God, and St. Paul appeals to the processes of nature as being an indication not only of the creative power, but also of the benevolence of God (Acts 14:17, cf. Romans 1:20). The OT is the history of a progressive revelation which is always looking forward to more perfect illumination, and the whole history of man is, according to the NT, the history of gradual enlightenment culminating in the Incarnation (Hebrews 1:2. John 14:9, Colossians 1:14).

(c) Restoration of man. — It has been a common subject of speculation in the Church whether the Incarnation would have taken place if man had not sinned, and it must be recognized that to such a question no decisive answer can be given. As a fact the Incarnation was conditioned by the existence of man’s sin, and the restoration of man is constantly put forward as its purpose. Three special aspects of this work of restoration may be noticed. (1) Christ offers an example of perfect and sinless humanity: He is the unique example of man as God intended him to be. The ideal of the human race becomes actual in Him. His life was one of perfect obedience to the will of God (Matthew 17:5. Luke 3:22, John 8:29). (2) He removed the barriers which sin had placed between man and his Creator. This work is invariably associated in the NT with His death and resurrection. It is described as an offering, a sacrifice, of Himself (Hebrews 9), which takes away the sin of the world (John 1:29). Many metaphors are used in the NT to describe the effect of His death and resurrection, such as redemption, which conveys the idea of a deliverance at a great cost from slavery; propitiation, or an act or process by which sin is neutralized; salvation, or bringing into a condition of health or safety; reconciliation with God, and remission of sin (see Atonement). (3) These two parts of Christ’s work for man were accomplished by His earthly life, death, and resurrection. But they do not comprise all that the Incarnation has done for the restoration of man. The completion of His work Christ left to His Church, the society which He founded, and in which He promised that He would dwell through the Holy Spirit. The Church, St. Paul says, is His body, living by His life and the instrunient of His work. Thus the Kingdom of God which Christ brought to the earth, and which He constantly speaks of both as being already come and as still to come, is visibly represented in His Church, which is ‘the Kingdom of heaven in so far as it has already come, and prepares for the Kingdom as it is to come in glory.’

4 . Relation of the NT doctrine to that of the Councils . — It has been seen above that the disciples knew our Lord first as a man, and that they advanced by degrees to a belief in His Divinity. Men educated in Jewish habits of thought would not readily apprehend in all its bearings the Christian idea of a Person who could be both God and man. It is therefore not surprising that there should be in the NT a diversity of treatment with regard to the question of the Person of Christ, and that it should be possible to recognize what may be called different levels of Christological belief. Before our Lord’s death the disciples had recognized Him as the Messiah, though with still very inadequate ideas as to the nature of the Messianic Kingdom which He was to set up. The Resurrection transformed this faith, and it naturally became the central point of their early teaching. The conception of Christ prominent in the earliest Apostolic age, and emphasized in the first part of the Acts and in the Epistles of 1 Peter, James, and Jude, regards Him primarily as the Messiah, the glory of whose Person and mission has been proved by the Resurrection, who has been exalted to God’s right hand, and who will be judge of quick and dead. St. Paul in Ills earlier Epistles regards Christ’s Person more from the point of view of personal religion, as One who has bridged over the gulf which sin has caused between God and man, and in whom man’s desire for reconciliation with God finds satisfaction. St. Paul’s later Epistles, as well as the Ep. to the Hebrews and St. John’s Gospel, deal with the cosmological and mystical aspects of the Incarnation, and contain the most definite statements of the Divinity of Christ.

It has been further maintained that the definitions of the doctrine made by the great Councils and embodied in the Creeds show an advance upon the doctrine contained in the NT. This was not, however, the view of those who drew up the definitions, for they invariably appealed to the NT writings as conclusive, and believed tnemselvea to be only formulating beliefs which had always been held by the Church. The language of the definitions was undoubtedly to some extent new, but it has never been shown that the substance of the doctrine expressed by them in any respect goes beyond what has been represented above as the teachmg of the NT. If the NT writers really believed, as has been maintained above, that Christ was a Person who was perfectly human and who was also Divine, there is nothing in the dogmatic decrees of the 4th and 5th centuries which asserts more than this. What these definitions do is to negative explanations which are inconsistent with these fundamental beliefs. It is not sur- B rising that men found it difficult to grasp the perfect livinity as well as the perfect humanity of Christ, and that attempts should have^been made to explain away one side or other of the doctrine of the Incarnation. The attempt which met with the widest success, and most threatened the doctrine of the Church, was that of Anus, who taught that the Son of God was a created being, a sort of demi-god. This teaching found ready support and sympathy among men who hadf not shaken off pagan habits of thought, and in opposing it the Church was contending for a true ‘Theism, which cannot endure the multiplication of objects of worship, no less than for Christianity. But although a word was used in the definition finally accepted, the celebrated Ao7m>(msto7i —’ of one substance with the Father’ — which was not used by any NT writer, it was used unwillingly, and only because other attempts to assert beyond the possibility of cavil the true Divinity of Christ had failed. Again, when the Divinity of Christ was fully accepted, the difficulty of believing the same Peraon to be both God and man led to attempts to explain away the perfect humanity. Apollinaris taught that the Word of God took the place of the human mind or spirit in Christ, as at a later period the Monothelites held that He had no human will; Nestorius practically denied an Incarnation, by holding that the Son of God and Jesus Christ were two separate persons, though united in a singular degree: Eutyches taught that the manhood in Christ was merged in the Godhead so as to lose its proper and distinct nature. These explanations contradicted in various ways the plain teaching of the Gospels that Christ was a truly human Person,and they were all decisively negatived by the Church in language which no doubt shows a distinct advance in theological thought, but without adding anything to the substance of the Apostolic doctrine. J. H. Maude.

Incense

(1) lebSnah, which should always be tr. ‘frankincense’ (wh. see). It was burnt with the meat-offering (Leviticus 2:1, 2, 15 6 etc.), and offered with the shewbread (Leviticus 24:7–9). (2) qetdreth, lit. ‘smoke,’ and so used in Isaiah 1:13. Psalms 66:15 141:2; used for a definite substance, Lv 10:1. Ezekiel 8:11 etc. (3) (humiama (Gr.), Luke 1:10. Revelation 5:8 8:3 18:13. The holy incense (Exodus 30:34) was made of stacte, onycha, galbanum, and frankincense, but the incense of later times, which was offered daily (Judith 9:1. Luke 1:8–10). was more complicated. According to Josephus, it had thirteen constituents (BJ v. v. 5). Incense was originally burned in censers, but these were latterly used only to carry coals from the great altar to the ‘altar of incense.’ E. W. G. Mastebman.

Incense, Altar of

See Tabernacle, § 6 (c). and Temple, § 4.

Incest

See Crimes and Punishments, § 3.

India

India (Heb. HdddH) is named as the E. boundary of the empire of Ahasuerus (Esther 1:1 S’). The Heb. is contracted from Hondu, the name of the river Indus. It indicated the country through which that river fiows: not the great peninsula of Hindustan. So also in 1 Maccabees 8:8. Ad. Esther 13 14. 1 Esdras 3:2. Possibly the drivers of the elephants (1 Maccabees 6:37) were true Indians. If India proper is not named, there is little doubt that from ancient times Israel had relations with the country, by means of the caravan trade through Arabia. Many of the articles of commerce in the account given of this trade are of Indian origin: e.g. ‘ivory and ebony,’ ‘cassia and calamus,’ ‘broidered work,’ and ‘rich apparel’ (Ezekiel 27:15, 19, 2). W. Ewing.

Indite

This Eng. verb is now somewhat old-fashioned. When it is used, it means to write. But formerly, and as found in AV, it meant to inspire or dictate to the writer. Thus St. Paul indited and Tertius wrote (Romans 16:22). The word occurs in the Preface to the AV and in Psalms 45:1 ‘My heart is inditing a good matter.’ In the Douai version (though this word Is not used) there is a note: ‘I have received by divine inspiration in my hart and cogitation a most high Mysterie.’

Infidel

This word has more force now than formerly. In AV it signifies no more than ‘unbeliever.’ It occurs in 2 Corinthians 6:15. 1 Timothy 5:8 (RV ‘unbeliever’ in both). So ‘infidelity’ in 2 Esdras 7:4 is simply ‘unbelief (Lat. incredvlitas).

Ingathering

See Tabernacles [Feast of].

Inheritance

It is a remarkable fact that the Hebrew language fails to discriminate between the inheritance of property and its possession or acquisition in any other manner. The two words most constantly used in this connejdon denote the idea of settled possession, but are quite indeterminate as to the manner in which that possession has been acquired. As might easily be inferred, from the historical circumstances of Israel’s evolution, the words became largely restricted to the holding of land, obviously the most important of all kinds of property among a pastoral or agricultural people.

i. Inheritance in Law and Custom. — 1. Property. — While land was the most Important part of an inheritance, the rules for succession show that it was regarded as belonging properly to the family or elan, and to the individual heir only as representing family or tribal rights. Cattle, household goods, and slaves would be more personal possessions, which a man could divide among his sons (Deuteronomy 21:16). Originally wives, too, as part of the property of the deceased, would tall to the possession of the heir-in-chief (cf. 2 Samuel 16:20–23, 1 Kings 2:13 ff.).

2. Heirs. — (a) The firstborn son, as the new head of the family, responsible for providing for the rest, inherited the land and had also his claim to a double portion of other kinds of wealth (Deuteronomy 21:17). To be the son of a concubine or inferior wife was not a bar to heirship (Genesis 21:10. 1 Chronicles 5:1) though a jealous wife might prevail on her husband to deprive such a son of the right of succession (Genesis 21:10). That a father had power to transfer the birthright from the firstborn to another is implied in the cases of Ishmael and Isaac (Genesis 21:10). Esau and Jacob (27:37), Reuben and Joseph (1 Chronicles 5:1). Adonijah and Solomon (1 Kings 1:11 ff.). But this was contrary to social usage, and is prohibited in Deuteronomy 21:15–17. Moreover, the exceptions to the rule are presented as examples of a Divine election rather than a human preference (Isaac, Genesis 21:12; Jacob, Mai l^^- ‘, Romans 9:13; Joseph, Genesis 49:24 ff.) Solomon, 1 Chronicles 22:9, 10). and can hardly be adduced as sur-vivals of the ancient custom of’ Junior Right.’ (6) At first a daughter could not succeed (the inheritance of the daughters of Job [Job 42:15) is noted as exceptional) — an arrangement that has been referred either to the influence of ancestor-worship, in which a male heir was necessary as priest of the family cult, or to the connexion between inheritance and the duty of blood revenge. For unmarried daughters, however, husbands would almost invariably be found. In the case of the daughters of Zelophehad (Numbers 27:1–11) we see the introduction of a change; but it is to be noted that this very case is associated with the provision (Numbers 36:1–12) that heiresses should marry only within their father’s tribe, so that the inheritance might not be alienated from it. (c) For the widow no immediate place was found in the succession. So far from being eligible as an heir, she was strictly a part of the property belonging to the inheritance. According to the levirate law, however, when a man died lea-ving no son, his brother or other next-of-kin (go’el) must marry the widow, and her firstborn son by this marriage became the heir of her previous husband(Dt 25:6). (d) For the order of succession the rule is laid down in Numbers 27:8–11 that if a man die without male issue the right of inheritance shall tall successively to his daughter, his brothers, his father’s brothers, his next kinsman thereafter. The pro-vision for the daughter was an innovation, as the context shows, but the rest of the rule is in harmony with the ancient laws of kinship.

ii. National and Religious Inheritance. — 1. The possession of the land of Canaan was commonly regarded as the inheritance of the whole people. In this particular case the inheritance was won only as the result of conflict and effort; moreover, theoretically at any rate, it involved the annihilation of the pre-vious inhabitants. Consequently the inheritance of Canaan was not entirely devoid of the idea of succession. But the extermination of the Canaanites was never effected ; and although the conquest was achieved only by the most strenuous effort, yet the Israelites were so strongly impressed with a -vi-vid sense of Jehovah’s intervention on their behalf, that to subsequent generations it seemed as if they had entered into the labours of others, not in any sense whatever by their own power, but solely by Jehovah’s grace. The inheritance of Canaan signified the secure possession of the land, as the gift of God to His people. ‘The dominant Biblical sense of inheritance is the enjoyment by a rightful title of that which is not the fruit of personal exertion’ (Westcott, Heb. 168).

2. It is not surprising that the idea of inheritance soon acquired religious associations. The Hebrew mind invested all social and political institutions with a religious significance. As Israel became increasingly conscious of its mission in, and began dimly to apprehend its mission to, the world, the peaceful and secure possession of Canaan seemed an indispensable condition of that self-development which was itself the necessary prelude to a more universal mission. The threatening attitude of the great world powers in the eighth and subsequent centuries B.C. brought the question prominently to the front. Over and over again it seemed as if Jerusalem must succumb to the hordes of barbarian invaders, and as if the last remnant of Canaan must be irretrievably lost; but the prophets persistently declared that the land should not be lost; they realized the impossibility of Israel’s ever realizing her true vocation, unJess, at any rate for some centuries, she preserved her national independence; and the latter would, of course, be wholly unthinkable without territorial security. The career of Israel, as a nation, the influence, even the existence, of its religion, would be endangered by the dispossession of Canaan; moreover, it was recognized that as long as the people remained true to Jehovah, He on His part would remain true to them, and would not suffer them to be dispossessed, but would make them dwell securely in their own land, in order that they might establish on their side those conditions of righteousness and justice which represented the national obligations, it Jehovah’s covenant with them was to be maintained.

3. The possession of the land, the inheritance of Canaan, symbolized the people’s living in covenant with their God, and all those spiritual blessings which flowed from such a covenant. And inasmuch as the validity of the covenant implied the continuance of Divine favour, the inheritance of the Holy Land was -viewed as the outward and -visible sign of God’s presence and power among His own. We know how the remorseless logic of history seemed to point to an opposite conclusion. The Exile spelt disinheritance; and disinheritance meant a great deal more than the loss of a little strip of territory; it meant the forfeiture pf spiritual blessings as a consequence of national sin. The more ardent spirits of the nation refused, however, to believe that these high privileges were permanently abrogated; they were only temporarily withdrawn; and they looked forward to a new covenant whose spiritual efficacy should be guaranteed by national restoration. In the reconstituted theocracy, the Messiah figured as the mediator both of temporal and of spiritual blessings. The Idea of a restored inheritance suggested at once the glorious anticipations of the Messianic age, when the people, not by works which they had done, but by Jehovah’s grace, should recover that which they had lost; and renew the covenant that had been broken.

4. In this sense ‘the inheritance’ became almost equivalent to the Messianic salvation; and participation in this salvation is not a future privilege, but a present possession. In the OT the secure inheritance of the Holy Land was the outward symbol of these spiritual blessings; under the New Dispensation they are assured by membership in the Christian body.

6. As every Jew regarded himself as an inheritor of the land of Canaan, so also is each Christian an inheritor of the Kingdom of heaven. He is not the heir, in the sense of enjoying an honorary distinction, or of anticipating future privileges; but as one who is already in a position of assured privilege, conferred upon him vrith absolute validity. As Lightfoot remarks, " Our Father never dies; the inheritance never passes away from Him; yet nevertheless we succeed to the full possession of it’ (fralatians’ 165).

6. Three particular usages remain to be noticed, (a) The Jews never lost the conviction that Jehovah was the supreme overlord of the land, and of the people that dwelt in it. Accordingly Canaan is the Holy Land, and Jehovah’s own inheritance; and Messiah when incarnate ‘came to His own country, and His own people received Him not.’ (6) The Jews also recognized that the possession of Canaan had value only in so far as it assured them of the free exercise of their religion, and all other spiritual blessings. This they strove to express by boldly declaring that Jehovah was Himself the inheritance of His people, (c) The Messiah, through whom the disinheritance should be brought to a close, and the covenant should be renewed, , was naturally regarded as the supreme ‘inheritor’ or ‘heir’ of all the promises and privileges implied in the covenant. As, moreover, the Messiah’s unique relation to the Father became more clearly defined, the idea of His inheritance, connoting His unique primogeniture and universal supremacy, became enlarged and expanded. It was, moreover, through the humanity which He restored that the Son proved and realized His heirship of all things; and thus His actual position is the potential exaltation of redeemed mankind.

J. C. Lambert and Ebnbst A. Edqhill.

Iniquity

See Sin.

Injurious

In the language of the AV ‘injurious’ is more than hurtful; it is also insulting. It ‘adds insult to injury.’ It occurs Sirach 8:11, 1 Timothy 1; and the Gr. word used in these places is in Romans 1:30 translated ‘despiteful’ (RV ‘insolent’).

Ink

Ink is mentioned once in OT (Jeremiah 36:18). Exodus 32:33 and Numbers 5 are adduced as evidence that the old Hebrew ink (derived from lamp-black [?]) could be washed off. From the bright colours that still survive in some papyri, it is evident that the ink used by the Egyptians must have been of a superior kind. The NT term for ‘ink,’ occurring three times (2 Corinthians 3. 2 Jn ", 3 Jn "), is melan {Ut. ‘black’). See, further, under ‘Writinq.

Inkhorn

In one of Ezekiel’s visions (Ezekiel 9) a man appears with a scribe’s inkhorn by his side (lit. ‘upon his loins’). The ‘inkhorn’ consisted of a case for the reed pens, with a cup or bulb for holding the ink, near the upper end of the case. It was carried in the girdle (hence the above expression).

Inn

See Hospitality.

Inner Man

The implied contrast involved in this expression may be regarded as exclusively Pauline. The antithesis between the adorning of the visible body, and ‘the incorruptible (ornament) of a meek and quiet spirit,’ ‘the hidden man of the heart ‘(I P 3»‘) is an example of the Paulinism which pervades this encyclical letter (see MofEatt, Historical NT p. 250). The contrast, so vividly portrayed in Romans 7:22 f.; is essentially ethical in its character. It is between the law which passion blindly follows, and that to which’ the mind’ or the informed conscience yields a delighted because a reasoned obedience (cf. Sanday-Headlam, Romans, in loc). Different from this is the contrast in 2 Corinthians 4:16, where ‘our outward man,’ decaying and dying, stands over against ‘our inward man,’ which is in a constant state of renewal. Here we have the antithesis of the ‘temporal’ and the ‘eternal’ elements in man’s complex personality (v. 18). This phrase is found in an absolute sense in Ephesians 3:16, where it denotes the entire basis of man’s higher life, on which God’s Spirit works, and in which Christ dwells. The intellectual and moral apprehension of the fruits of the Incarnation depend, flirst and last, upon whether ‘the inward man’ has its roots struck deep in that Divine love which is the first cause of man’s redemption (v. 17 ff.) cf. John 3:16).

J, R. Wii/Lis.

Inspiration

The subject comprises the doctrine of inspiration in the Bible, and the doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible, together with what forms the transition from the one to the other, the account given of the prophetic consciousness, and the teaching of the NT about the OT.

1. The agent of inspiration is the Holy Spirit (see p. 360) or Spirit of God, who is active in Creation (Genesis 1:2, Ps 104), , is imparted to man that the dust may become living soul (Genesis 2:7), is the source of exceptional powers of body (Judges 6:34 14:6, 19) or skill (Exodus 35:31) but is pre-eminently manifest in prophecy (wh. see). The NT doctrine of the presence and power of the Spirit of God in the renewed life of the believer is anticipated in the OT, inasmuch as to the Spirit’s operations are attributed wisdom (Job 32:8, 1 Kings 3:28, Deuteronomy 34:9), courage (Judges 13:25 14:6), penitence, moral strength, and purity (Nehemiah 9:20, Psalms 51:11, Isaiah 63:10, Ezekiel 36:26, Zee 12:10). The promise of the Spirit by Christ to His disciples was fulfilled when He Himself after the Resurrection breathed on them, and said, ‘Receive ye the Holy Ghost’ (John 20:22). and after His Ascension the Spirit descended on the Church with the outward signs of the wind and fire (Acts 2). The Christian life as such is an inspired life, but the operation of the Spirit is represented in the NT in two forms; there are the extraordinary gifts (charisms) — speaking with tongues, interpreting tongues, prophecy, miracles (1 Corinthians 12), — all of which St. Paul subordinates to faith, hope, love (ch. 13); and there are the fruits of the Spirit in moral character and religious disposition (Galatians 5:22, 23). Intermediate may be regarded the gifts for special functions in the Church, as teaching, governing, exhorting (Romans 12:7, 8). The prophetic inspiration is continued (Romans 12:6) but superior is the Apostolic (1 Corinthians 12:28) (see Apostles).

2. The doctrine of the inspiration of the NT attaches itself to the promise of Christ to His disciples that the Holy Spirit whom the Father would send in His name should teach them all things, and bring to their remembrance all things that He had said to them (John 14:26) and that, when the Spirit of truth had come, He should guide them into all the truth, and should declare to them the things that were to come ( 16:13). . These promises cover the contents of Gospels, Epistles, and the Apocalypse. The inspiration of Christ’s own words is affirmed in His claim to be alone in knowing and revealing the Father (Matthew 11:27). and His repeated declaration of His dependence in His doctrine on the Father.

3. Christ recognizes the inspiration of the OT (Mt 22:43). 9,nd the authority of the prophets (Luke 24:25). The word ‘inspire’ is used only in Wisdom 15:11 ‘Because he was ignorant of him that moulded him, and of him that inspired into him an active soul, and breathed into him a vital spirit.’ The word ‘inspiration’ is used in this general sense in Job 32:8 AV ‘But there is a spirit in man; and the inspiration (RV’ breath’) of the Almighty giveth them understanding.’ In special reference to the OT we find in 2 Timothy 3:16 (RV) ‘every scripture inspired of God is also profitable for teaching,’ etc. While the term is not used, the fact is recognized in 2 Peter 1:21 ‘For no prophecy ever came by the will of man; but men spake from God, being moved by the Holy Ghost.’ It must be added, however, that both these passages are in writings the Apostolic authorship of which is questioned by many scholars. But the NT view of the authority of the OT is fully attested in the use made of the OT as trustworthy history, true doctrine, and sure prophecy; and yet the inaccuracy of many of the quotations, as well as the use of the Greek translation, shows that the writers, whether they held a theory of verbal inspiration or not, were not bound by it.

4. Although the doctrine of the inspiration of the Bible does not properly fall within the scope of a Bible Dictionary, a brief summary of views held in the Christian Church may be added: (a) The Theory of verbal inspiration affirms that each human author was but the mouthpiece of God, and that in every word, therefore, God speaks. But the actual features of the Bible, as studied by reverent and believing scholarship, contradict the theory. (6) The theory of degrees of inspiration recognizes suggestion, direction, elevation, and superintendency of the human by the Divine Spirit; but it is questionable whether we can so formally define the process, (c) The dynamical theory recognizes the exercise of hum?,n faculties in the author, but maintains their illumination, stimulation, and purification by the Spirit of God, in order that in doctrine and ethics the Divine mind and will may be correctly and sufficiently expressed; but this divorces literature from life, (d) We may call the view now generally held personal inspiration: by the Spirit of God men are in various degrees enlightened, filled with zeal and devotion, cleansed and strengthened morally, brought into more immediate and intimate communion with God; and this new life, expressed in their writings, is the channel of God’s revelation of Himself to men. In place of stress on the words and the ideas of Scripture, emphasis is now laid on the moral character and religious disposition of the agents of revelation. Alfbed E. Garvie.

Instant

Instant’ and ‘instantly’ are now used only of time. In AV they have their earlier meaning of ‘urgent,’ ‘urgently,’ as in Luke 23:23 ‘they were instant with loud voices, requiring that he might be crucified’; Luke 7:4 ‘they besought him instantly’ (RV ‘earnestly’). Cf. Erasmus, Paraphrase, i. 31, ‘whoso knocketh at the doore instantly, to him it shal be opened.’