Page:The Collected Works of Theodore Parker Discourse volume 1.djvu/262

Rh same whether the Word contradicts Reason and Conscience, or agrees with them.

This opinion about the Bible is true, or not true. If true it is capable of proof, at least of being shown to be probable. Now there are but four possible ways of establishing the fact, namely:—

1. By the authority of Churches, having either a miraculous inspiration, or a miraculous tradition, to prove the alleged infallibility of the Bible. But the Churches are not agreed on this point. The Roman Church very stoutly denies the fact, and besides, the Protestants deny the authority of the Roman Church.

2. By the direct testimony of God in our Consciousness assuring us of the miraculous infallibility of the Bible. This would be at the best one miracle to prove another, which is not logical. The proof is only subjective, and is as valuable to prove the divinity of the Koran, the Shaster, and the Book of Mormon, as that of the Jewish and Christian Scriptures. It is the argument of the superstitious and enthusiastical.

3. By the fact that the Bible claims this divine infallibility. This is reasoning in a circle, though it is the method commonly relied on by Christians. It will prove as well the divinity of any impostor who claims it.

4. By an examination of the contents of the Bible, and the external history of its origin. To proceed in this way, we must ask, Are all its statements infallibly true? But to ask this question presupposes the standard-measure is in ourselves, not in the Bible; so at the utmost the Book can be no more infallible, and have no more authority, than Reason and the Moral Sense by which we try it. A single mistake condemns its infallibility, and of course its divinity. But the case is still worse. After the truth of a book is made out, before a work in human language, like other books, can be referred to God as its author, one of two things must be shown: either That its contents could not