SUNDAY-SCHOOL SECTION.
LESSON III.—THE TEACHER’S OFFICE AND WORK.
In this brief outline we propose to consider the teacher’s office and work in five aspects:
I. The work of the teacher is for the gospel of Christ, hence, first of all, the teacher should be a Christian.—No person can properly instruct others in the Gospel unless he be devoted to the service of Christ.
1. He should be a Christian in belief.—No one can speak confidently and earnestly in behalf of a cause unless he believes in it. One can teach mythology, but not Christianity, without a firm conviction that the Bible is God’s book, and the Gospel the declaration of the divine plan for saving men.
2. He should be a Christian in experience; having passed from death unto life, enjoying the consciousness of sonship, and a communion with Christ; for only in this state can he enter into sympathy with the Gospel, understand its mysteries, and guide others into the way of salvation.
3. He should be a Christian in Life.—The example will teach more weightily than the words; therefore he must show forth in his conduct the character which he would impart, and live in the realm to which he would lead his class.
II. The teacher’s work is under the auspices of the church, and therefore the teacher should be a church member.
1. He should be a church member in profession, giving to the church the benefit of his influence in the community, in return for all the benefits that the church gives to him.
2. He should be a church member in loyalty, holding an attachment, not to the church in general, but to that particular church whose doctrines, forms, methods and spirit are most nearly in accord with his own views, and best adapted to aid his growth in grace; devoted to it, laboring for it, and self-denying in behalf of it.
3. He should be a church member in work.—There are two classes of people in every church, the idle and the working, those who are carried, and those who carry. The teacher should be one of the working members, bearing the church upon his heart and its work in his hands.
III. The teacher’s work is with the Bible, and therefore the teacher should be a Bible student.
1. A Bible student in teachableness, going to the Word, not in the spirit of criticism, but of reverence; studying it not to inject into it his own opinions, but humbly to obtain truth which shall feed his own soul, and supply the needs of his class.
2. A Bible student in diligence.—The cursory glance at a book may answer for the careless reader, but he who has it as his work to teach the Word, must study it; not only the lesson, but the volume which contains the lesson, for unless he has knowledge of the book at large, he cannot understand the specific lesson for his class; therefore the teacher should be a constant, persevering, laborious student of the Bible.
IV. The teacher’s work has relation to living souls, and therefore he must be a friend.—No mere machine can teach living hearts; to influence souls there must be a soul, not by knowledge only, or by gifts of expression, but by the relation of heart more than by any other power can scholars be led upward to the best in thought and life.
1. He must be a friend in sympathy, that is, in capacity to feel with his scholars, which is very different from feeling for them. He must be able in thought and feeling, to put himself in his scholars’ place, to see the world through their eyes, and to have an appreciation of their nature.
2. He must be a friend in helpfulness.—Not the greatness of our doing for others, but the spirit of it, measures our friendship. By little kindnesses to his class the teacher can win their hearts, and by tying them to himself, tie them to his Master.
V. The teacher’s work is a teaching work, and he must therefore be a teacher.
1. He must be a teacher in knowledge.—He must know his lesson in all its departments and bearings, and with a wealth of information far greater that he expects to impart to his class; for power in teaching proceeds more from the reserve force of the things known and kept back, than from the things taught.
2. He must be a teacher in tact; that is, in wisdom, to know opportunities and skill to use them. Tact is a gift, but it may be cultivated and improved by application. And, “if any of you lack wisdom, let him ask of God, that giveth to all men liberally and upbraideth not, and it shall be given him.” James 1:5.
LESSON IV.—THE CANON OF SCRIPTURE.
The English word canon is a literal re-spelling of the Greek word meaning “a straight rod,” hence, “a rule or standard.” As used in reference to the Bible, it means:
1. The rule or fundamental principle of truth.
2. The catalogue of the books which contain that truth. As there are two testaments, the old and new, it is necessary to notice the canon of each separately, answering the question, “How came the Bible in its present form?”
I. The Old Testament Canon.—In the growth of the Old Testament we can trace six stages.
1. The Oral Period, extending from the earliest ages down to the time of the patriarchs, during which the Divine Revelation and the records of the past were transmitted by tradition, or in a few detached documents, like Genesis x.
2. The Mosaic Period (1500-1400 B. C.) When from ancient manuscripts, tradition and revelation were written the book of Job, and the earliest draft of the Pentateuch, and Joshua.
3. The Davidic Period (1100-1000 B. C.), the age of Samuel, David and Solomon, when, after the disorders in the time of the Judges, literature began to flourish anew, and Judges, Ruth, Samuel, the first draft of Psalms and Proverbs, the Song of Solomon, and perhaps (but by no means with certainty) Ecclesiastes were written.
4. The Prophetic Period (800-600 B. C.), in the decline of the monarchy, when the prophets suddenly arose to prominence, and the books of Kings and most of the prophetical books were written.
5. The Period of the Restoration (500-400 B. C.), after the return from captivity, when the writings of all the four greater prophets were arranged, the prophecies of Haggai, Zachariah, and Malachi were delivered, and the historical books of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah and Esther were written.
6. The Period of Arrangement (400-150 B. C.). With the time of Ezra and Nehemiah a new era began. No more books were added, but the literature was systematized. Ezra made the first compilation of the Scriptures; Nehemiah formed a library of the recognized works (according to ancient Jewish history); the work was revised under the early Maccabean princes, and the writings assumed their present form. Josephus, the historian, names as authoritative the same works that are now recognized.
II. The New Testament Canon.—The Old Testament was in process of construction more than ten centuries, the New Testament, less than one; but in it there was also a growth.
1. The Early Period.—Between the death of Stephen, A. D. 37, and the council at Jerusalem, A. D. 50, were written the earliest books, the Gospel of Matthew and the Epistle of James.
2. The Pauline Period.—Between the council at Jerusalem, A. D. 50, and the destruction of Jerusalem, A. D. 70, appeared the Gospels of Mark and Luke, the Epistles of Peter, the Epistles of Paul and Hebrews.
3. The Closing Period, after the destruction of Jerusalem, between 70 and 96 A. D., witnessed the Epistle of Jude, and the Epistles and Gospel of John and the Revelation.
How the systematic canon of New Testament books came to be recognized can not now be ascertained. The matter was probably determined by the inherent fitness of the writings themselves. The worthy books lived, the unworthy dropped out of notice, as may be seen by comparing the New Testament with the New Testament Apocrypha. The councils voiced the sentiment of the church in their decisions; and though there were differences of opinion concerning a few books, extending through the second and third centuries, by A. D. 300 the list of canonical books in the New Testament was generally accepted throughout the church, as it is still held.
III. The genuineness of the Bible; that is, the belief that we have the Bible substantially as it was written, without serious interpolation or erasure, is supported by the following evidences (Chautauqua Text-Book No. 18, pp. 26-27):
1. The numerous ancient manuscripts now in existence, which substantially agree in the text.
2. The quotations from Scripture, and references to it, in the writings of the early fathers and in the rabbinical paraphrases.
3. The ancient translations of the Old and New Testaments.
4. The decisions of early and learned councils.
5. The jealousy and watchfulness of opposing sects, all of which base their faith on the same Scriptures.
6. The early controversies between Christians and their enemies, referring to these books as authoritative upon believers.
7. The reverence and scrupulous care of copyists of the Scriptures in all ages.
8. The unimportant character of the “various readings” in the manuscripts, showing that their differences are of trifling account. From these considerations it is certain that our Bible does not essentially differ from the Bible of the primitive church.
