I hear some one say,--It seems to trouble _you_ very much that inspired writers should be thought capable of making mistakes; but it does not trouble _me_,--Very likely not. It does not trouble _you_, perhaps, to see stone after stone, buttress after buttress, foundation after foundation, removed from the walls of Zion, until the whole structure trembles and totters, and is pronounced insecure. Your boasted unconcern is very little to the purpose, unless we may also know how dear to you the safety of Zion is. But if you make indignant answer,--(as would to Heaven you may!)--that your care for GOD'S honour, your jealousy for God's oracles, is every whit as great as our own,--_then_ we tell you that, on _your_ wretched premises, men more logical than yourself will make shipwreck of their peace, and endanger their very souls. There is no stopping,--no knowing where to stop,--in this downward course. Once admit the principle of fallibility into the inspired Word, and the whole becomes a bruised and rotten reed. If St. Paul a little, why not St. Paul much? If Moses in some places, why not in many? You will doubt our LORD'S infallibility next!... It might not trouble _you_, to find your own familiar friend telling you a lie, every now and then: but I trust this whole congregation will share the preacher's infirmity, while he confesses that it would trouble _him_ so exceedingly that after one established falsehood, he would feel unable ever to trust that friend implicitly again. Do you mean to say then, (I shall be asked,) that you maintain the theory of Verbal Inspiration?--I answer, I refuse to accept any _theory_ whatsoever[376]. But I believe that the Bible is the Word of GOD--and I believe that GOD'S Word must be absolutely infallible. I shall therefore believe the Bible to be absolutely infallible,--until I am convinced of the contrary. "_Theories of Inspiration_," (as they are called,) are the growth of an unbelieving age: and it is enough to disgust any one with the term, to find how it has been understood in some quarters. A well-known living editor of the Gospel[377], says,--"According to the Verbal-Inspiration Theory, each Evangelist has recorded the exact words of the Inscription on the Cross;--not _the general sense_, but _the Inscription itself_;--not a letter less nor more. This is absolutely necessary to the theory." The advocates of the theory (he proceeds) "may here find an _undoubted_ example of the absurdity of their view.... Let us bear this in mind when the narrative of words spoken, or of events, differs in a similar manner."--It is certainly very kind of the learned writer thus to apprize us of the danger of accepting a theory, which, so explained, we certainly never heard of before,--and trust we may never hear of again.