respective writers were INSPIRED, then "the differences" which "M." speaks of are the

result of his own confusion, for all alike are equally and fully inspired.

In the business world there are shades and degrees of falsehood. We have heard of

"white lies" and "business lies", but they are all "lies" nevertheless; and so with the

Scriptures. The slightest departure from perfect and complete inspiration means that such

departure or "measure", call it what you will, is fallible and liable to error, which idea we

absolutely repudiate.

The emphasis placed by "M." and others like him on the words of Christ is

misleading. Humanly speaking the first Gospel is in the words of Matthew and the first

epistle in the words of Paul. But are they not all the words of Christ, O.T. Scriptures

included? Did not "the Spirit of Christ" speak the words of inspired prophecy

(I Pet. 1: 11)? Was not Paul's prison ministry "the testimony of our Lord"? (II Tim. 1: 8).

If we admit any difference in inspiration (which we do not) we should say that the later

revelation of Christ given to Paul from heaven was of greater weight than the earlier

ministry of Christ on earth (Heb. 12: 25).

The charge often made against those who believe Dispensational Truth is that they rob

God's children of most of their Bible. But we believe it is demonstrated that the case is

the reverse of this. We rightly divide a Word of TRUTH, and make no invidious

comparisons between the inspiration of Matthew or Paul. Those who share the opinions

of our brother wrongly divide the Word and are obliged to speak of some parts as being

more inspired than others. In essence "M." robs us of all infallible Scripture except the

four Gospels.

Enough of this phase of the subject. "M." in seeking to save his readers from the

imaginary ditch of a rightly divided word has landed himself and his readers in a very

bog of confusion. We shall examine his criticism of our teaching further in subsequent

papers. Meanwhile we believe we have demonstrated that his own views render him

upon his own confession unfit to be a teacher of the Word.

In order to understand the purport of the Gospel according to Matthew one must

understand the intention of the Holy Spirit when He names Christ in the opening verse

"The Son of David".

We were under the impression that the genealogy given in Matthew (which differs

from that given in Luke) was intentionally placed where it is, in order that the crown

rights to the throne of David may be clearly set forth as belonging to the Lord Jesus:

further, that the opening words of the wise men, "Where is He that is born KING OF