actually write the article, as it would be to deny that Paul wrote the

Epistle to the Romans because of what Tertius says in Romans 16:22.

So with the writing of Scripture, 'God, Who at sundry times and in

divers manners, spake in time past ... by the prophets' (Heb. 1:1).  However

differing the 'manners', one thing remained constant, it was God Who spoke.

Moses was peculiarly favoured by God.  'Hear now My words: If there be a

prophet among you, I the Lord will make Myself known unto him in a vision,

and will speak unto him in a dream.  My servant Moses is not so, who is

faithful in all Mine house.  With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even

apparently, and not in dark speeches: and the similitude of the Lord shall he

behold' (Num. 12:6 -8).

Into the question of how the revelation of truth was given we will not

enter further here, but turn to the testimony of Peter, as given in 2 Peter

1.  Speaking of the Second Coming of the Lord, Peter declares first of all:

'We have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you

the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ' (2 Pet. 1:16).  His testimony

now divides into two parts: (1) His own personal experience, and (2) The

testimony of the Word of prophecy.

Peter's experience on the mount of Transfiguration was blessedly real

and true.  So far as Peter was concerned, nothing could remove the impression

he there received.  But he was commissioned to preach, not his experiences,

but the Word.  Experiences are worthless compared with one clear statement of

Scripture.  Yet many a child of God is misleading himself and others by

experiences.  While we may be ready to grant that an experience is

real and true, the fallibility of the interpreter of these experiences is

generally too obvious to allow us to trust them.  And, strictly speaking, the

experiences themselves often become very small when stripped of all

associations and sentiments, and submitted to a cross -examination.  Peter,

therefore, turns even from the true experience of the mount of

Transfiguration to something 'more sure':

'We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that

ye take heed in your hearts, as unto a light that shineth in a dark

place, until the day dawn, and the day Star arise' (2 Pet. 1:19).

In the article Glory2, it is written:

'As Peter said, the vision in the holy mount made the Word of prophecy

"more sure"'.

This conflicts a little with the comment given here, but as Alford comments:

'And we have more sure the prophetic word ... either in the sense of:

we hold faster, making bebaioteron quasi -adverbial: or

we possess, more secure ...'.

Further to complicate the labours of the interpreter is the remote context of

verse 10, where the apostle urges his reader to 'make his calling and

election "sure"'.

It is possible that there is an intended double significance:

The vision confirmed Peter in his belief in the prophetic Word,