1 April 2008

THEORIES OF INSPIRATION (Continued)

In this session we will consider the Illumination Theory of Inspiration.

Strong (Systematic Theology) defines this theory. "The Illumination Theory holds that the Bible contains, rather than is, the Word of God. Its writers were merely given further insight, though of the same type, as might be given to any believer. It removes the fact that the writer might not fully understand what he has written."

The truth of the matter is that the human penmen of the inspired record do not always understand that which they have written. Such is the power of inspiration. Daniel had this experience. "And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?" (Daniel 12:8)

Further, the fact of inspiration does not lay upon man. We have discussed this in previous sessions. If the inspiration was on the authority, or even just the "art" of man, that inspiration would die with the man. Inspiration is upon the Words of Scripture. This is why a true copy is every bit as authoritative as the "original manuscripts" about which the modern Bible critic is so quick to mention.

Inspiration is of God. It is not of the best efforts of man, even of a pious man. The put the inspiration under the thought process of man, so that it must be that which he can always understand, removes the power of God from the process and the true illumination of the Spirit from both the transmission and prayerful study of the Words.

The point over whether the Bible is, or just contains, the Word of God was a point of great controversy among the theologians of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. The Fundamentalist argued that the Bible is the Word of God. The Modernist argued that the Bible merely contains the Word of God.

Both of these camps, now more commonly known as the Fundamental/Evangelical and the Liberal/Mainline, have moved markedly to the left of center in the ensuing years. It is now the Fundamentalist who will argue that the Bible merely contains the Words of God. He will still argue for full inspiration of "the original manuscripts," but will also argue that these are lost. The best we can do is examine those manuscripts which we do have and try to reconstruct what the originals might have said.

In doing this, while arguing for a fully inspired original, he is arguing for merely a concept, a close cousin of Illumination of the message, preservation. Thus, in the world of practical hermeneutics he has accepted the argument of Illumination over real inspiration when he only agrees that the Bible contains the Word, or the general concept, of the God story.

The Modernist camp, meanwhile, has abandoned the concept of practical inspiration from the breath of God. He will often argue that the Scripture is only the ancient, and inspiring (Note the difference an "ing" makes of the word!) story of man’s search for God and the meaning of life.

Strong will argue that Illumination may have been used in some cases. However, he will note that Illumination is not the same as Revelation. The Scripture is revelation from God. "The Illumination of the Holy Spirit gives no new truth, but only a vivid apprehension of the truth already revealed. Any original communication of truth must have required a work of the Spirit different, not in degree, but in kind."

We might understand the difference when we consider the pastor’s preparation of the Sunday Sermon. The pastor will study the Words of Scripture. He will pray over the Words of Scripture as he attempts to convey the message which God has for His people for this time. The Spirit might show him that a certain passage speaks to a current need. This is illumination. The Light of Truth is shown upon the Words of Eternity. Those Words are illuminated so that the application might be seen more clearly for the present situation.

Strong continues in this thought when he argues that the Illumination Theory is not logical.

"The theory is logically indefensible as intimating that illumination with regard to truth can be imparted without first imparting truth itself, whereas God must first furnish objective truth to be perceived before He can illuminate the mind to perceive the meaning of the truth."

Did you catch that? The purpose of illumination is to "enlighten" our understanding of the truth which God has imparted. Until that Truth is imparted, there can be no illumination.

Strong also sees that the Illumination Theory would not give us an infallible Scripture. "The illumination theory would not have protected the writers from possible error."

This would leave us with the same problem as with the Partial Inspiration Theory. We would have no reliable way to consider which parts were the Truth of God’s presentation and which parts were merely the ideas of man. This would also serve to lower the grandeur of God’s power in inspiration.

Bancroft (Elemental Theology) would have us understand that true illumination happens as Scripture is read, not as those Scriptures are given.

"Since Pentecost, all believers have been indwelt ... by the Holy Spirit... Because the Holy Spirit is the ultimate author of Scripture through the medium of inspiration ... He is the ultimate interpreter... This gift of understanding Scripture is usually called illumination ... The divine writer ... Becomes the divine interpreter..."

Once again we see the concept that illumination is not the means of inspiration. Illumination, of the Spirit, is the interpreter of inspiration.

As stated above, this has become in practice, if not in theory, the stance held by those who have forsaken the Traditional Text of Scripture. This is the case of nearly all of the modern English language Bible versions and translations as they argue that the true Scripture was lost for about one thousand years.

These persons argue that with Tischendorf, Hort, Westcott, et. al., we have found that many errors crept into the Scripture over the centuries. It is the job of the Bible critic to go back and correct those errors. The only real preservation of the Scripture, most of them would argue, is of the general concept of the thoughts of the Scripture.

I would argue, how can the concept and thoughts be preserved if the Words were not? It seems a contradiction of logic to argue thus.

This is an argument that God did not preserve His Words. This is argued continually with the new editions supplanting other "new" editions. This makes, to this endeavor, the Sure Word of God no more certain than the next discovery.

Can we trust the eternal destiny of our immortal souls to such a construct? Thank God for the preservation of His Word. We do not have to wonder what He has said. We do not have to trust a "maybe." We can trust the God of power, love, inspiration, and preservation!

The fact is that those who attempt to reconstruct what they believe God might have meant to say is to remove all trust in the very Words of Scripture even if lip service is given to those Scriptures as having been inspired. Rather than accepting a Scripture which "was" inspired, God has preserved for us a Scripture which IS inspired.

This concept of the Illumination Theory is also carried forth among those versions which would translate via paraphrase (thought for thought transference) rather than a word for word translation.

The Words of the Word are important. The Illumination Theory would marginalize the magnificence of God in the inspiration of the Scripture.

In our next session we will consider the Dynamical Theory of Inspiration.

8 April 2008

THEORIES OF INSPIRATION (Continued)

In this session we will consider the Dynamical Theory of Inspiration.

Strong (Systematic Theology) provides us with a short overview of this theory of inspiration.

He notes that this theory postulates three things about inspiration. The first is: "Inspiration is not only to the writers but, more importantly to the Scriptures."

The main problem I have with this is that it puts inspiration, although only partially, upon the penmen who inscribed the Scripture. As we have noted at various points, inspiration did not fall upon the writers of Scripture. Had this been so, the Scripture would be time centric. It is not. The Scripture, as the very Words of God enunciated into the Words which were transcribed onto the parchment, were and are eternal.

The Words of Scripture are the Words of God. Therefore, these words are of His pronouncements. As such, those Words are eternal even as He is eternal. As such, those Words are without error even as He is without error. As such, those Words are powerful even as He is powerful.

The Words, while I believe they may have been culled from the vocabularies and experiences of the penmen, are the Words of God. He led these men, and superintended their efforts, in such a way that the Words they wrote were His Words, Words of His choice.

The penmen may have been led of God; sometimes the Words were directly quoted from the visions, etc., which God allowed. But, the penmen were not, themselves, inspired. They may have been empowered for the task. They were not inspired. It was, and is, the Words which are inspired of God.

Second: "Inspiration is both natural and Supernatural as God worked in the souls of man."

No! Inspiration insures that we are given a message which is entirely Supernatural. To insist that any of the Scripture is naturalistic is to argue that parts of the Scripture are not of God.

I write. That’s what I do. I believe that most of my writing is correct. But, even when I am writing on the things of God I am a human being, thus prone to error. That is why I caution those who read what I write to check my words against the Words of Scripture. When the two do not agree, the error is mine. Every single time!

Therefore, to argue that inspiration may be partially natural is to argue that not all of Scripture is trustworthy. What the Spirit of God has providentially led the Christians of His churches to retain is that which has been providentially preserved. This is Scripture. Other voices which may be unearthed by the archeologist’s spade has not been so preserved; it is not Scripture. It may be very moral and inspiring, but it is not inspired Scripture if the Spirit did not lead His people to keep those words for all the Age of Grace.

What is "natural" is not "eternal." What is "natural" is not a message from God. What is "natural" is not inspired. No work of the creature is the message of the Creator.

Finally: "The Scripture has a human as well as a divine element. The divine truth is shaped so that the human mind can comprehend it."

I wouldn’t begin to argue with the second sentence. "The divine truth is shaped so that the human mind can comprehend it." That, indeed, is the purpose of Scripture. God, from the eternal and spiritual realm, is explaining Himself, and His message, to people who are of time and physicality. In His inspired Words He is explaining things to us for which we have no frame of reference.

I have never lived within a fish tank. I have no idea what it would be like to swim endlessly in a ten gallon glass tank. I don’t know what it is to have a huge species drop food into the water above my head.

I really don’t want to know!

The things of Heaven and eternity would be even further from my knowledge. I’ve seen a fish bowl. I know what they are. I have never seen Heaven. Whatever I might know about Heaven is only because the One Who has experience Heaven has explained Heavenly things to me in His Book.

"Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen, and ye receive not our witness. If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things? And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven." (John 3:11-13)

No matter how pious and Godly a man may be, he is not qualified to speak of the things of Heaven in the way of instruction. The best he can ever hope to do is to speak the Words of God. This is the essence of inspiration: The penmen were not inspired; God inspired the Words which they were privileged to write.

Neither was the writing material inspired. Faithful copies carry the same inspiration as did those original manuscripts. The material upon which those "original autographs" were first written has succumbed to the dust of the ages. But, the Words are eternal. Inspiration does presently lie upon faithfully preserved copies of the Words God originally inspired.

The only "human element" associated with inspiration is that God used human men to transcribe His Own inspired Words.

We see an illustration of this concept every time we witness. We have not died upon a cross and then resurrected the third day. Even if we had done so our own inherited sin nature would preclude us from offering salvation to anyone. But, we do offer this salvation. God has ordained that His message of sin and salvation be taken into the world through the agency of human persons.

God empowers that message of our witness through the work of the Holy Spirit. We are giving the message of what Jesus has already done. The Spirit empowers the witness. As the sinner responds to the message of Christ, even though we are relating that message, the Spirit moves upon His heart. The Father then forgives not on the basis of our witness, but on the basis of the finished Word of the Savior.

Likewise, the human instrument put pen to paper. But the Words written were the Words of God.

"For the word of God is quick, and powerful, and sharper than any twoedged sword, piercing even to the dividing asunder of soul and spirit, and of the joints and marrow, and is a discerner of the thoughts and intents of the heart." (Hebrews 4:12)

Look at the verse above. "...the word of God is..." The Words inspired of God are not simple words. They are active Words. They do things. They are Living Words from the Living God.

I have to disagree with this dynamical theory. It does not give due credit to God even as it gives man credit he does not deserve.

In our next session we will consider the Verbal, Plenary Theory of Inspiration.

15 April 2008

THEORIES OF INSPIRATION (Continued)

In this session we will consider the Verbal, Plenary Theory of Inspiration.

Chafer (Major Bible Themes) explains the meaning of this theory. "By verbal inspiration it is meant that the Spirit of God guided in the choice of words..." Also, "...plenary ... Mans ‘full inspiration,’ as opposed to ... partial inspiration..."

The concept of the human penmen being "guided in the choice of words" does not equate with the dictation theory as discussed earlier. In some cases there was directed dictation. Often in the Pentateuch, and a few other places, we will see that God has said, "Write down the words I say."

More often the guidance was a prayerful impression upon the human penman that guided his choice of words. God also led these men through such life experiences that they did write the very words which He had chosen for them to use.

Even though God used the human personalities, and vocabularies, of His chosen penmen, the Words which were produced were the Words of God. That is the meaning of inspiration. The Words were the Words of God.

The Psalmist says, "For ever O LORD, thy word is settled in heaven." (Psalm 119:89) Since the Words are the Words of God, they have His attribute of eternality. This is the meaning of this verse. Heaven is not a time centric concept. Heaven is of eternity. Therefore, if the Word of God is settled in Heaven, and settled "For ever," then the nature of the Word of God is eternal. It is not subject to decay in time. The concept of Tischendorf, Hort, Westcott, Nestle’, et. al., can not be correct. These all argue that the Words of God were lost in time and need to be searched out so that those Words can be "recovered."

For men to argue that the King James Bible, for instance, is flawed at its base because of all the new discoveries of the past four hundred years is, then a false view according to this view of inspiration. Men may argue only for a "concept inspiration" in which the Words were lost but the concept was carried forth. This is also a false view in that it argues that the Words of God were not "settled" forever.

The idea of "concept" is a nebulas thing that can argue nearly anything as true. It makes the Words of God subservient to the analogies of man. Such is not a stable method of inspiration and is denied when the word "verbal" is attached to the theory of inspiration. "Verbal" inspiration without a preserved text is a contradiction in terms.

The meaning of the Verbal, Plenary concept is that the Words, themselves, were inspired of God. It is obvious that the human penmen were guided by the Spirit of God in their tasks. But, it is false to contend that these human persons were inspired on a personal basis. This would make the words of Scripture the product of human persons. These Words may have been written by those human persons but those Words remain the Words of God.

Under Verbal, Plenary inspiration we see that the Words which were written were, Themselves, the Words of the Lord. With this understanding we can easily see that those Words were of God and, therefore, eternal Words.

This also means that those very Words are still inspired today in accurately preserved copies because they remain the Word of the Unchanging, Eternal, God. Therefore, no translation, no matter how accurately translated, even if translated from pure copies of the inspired manuscripts, can be itself inspired.

The Words which God gave were in those original languages. They were not given in a new tongue, even if that new tongue accurately conveys the Message of those Words. We may hold our King James Bible’s aloft and say, "This is the Word of God." But, we can only say this in a derivative sense as the King James Bible, nearly alone on the market of today’s translations, is based upon the preserved Text which God originally inspired. But, in the deepest sense, we cannot say that the King James Bible, or any translation, is inspired.

Still, God will allow us to use, for the benefit of His people, a faithful translation of His Inspired and Preserved Words.

Simmons (A Systematic Study of Bible Doctrine) has listed several Scriptural reasons why we accept the concept of Verbal Inspiration. Simmons has said that "Inspired Scripture necessarily involves Verbal Inspiration..."

"Paul affirmed that He used Words taught him by the Holy Spirit... I Cor. 2:13..."

"Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."

Some have argued that Paul was teaching "new" doctrine. To the ears of men it might have seemed so. But, Paul acknowledged that he was teaching the doctrine of God. As we will see next, Peter agreed with Paul on this point.

"Peter affirmed the Verbal Inspiration of his own and other Apostle’s writings... II Pet. 3:1, 2, 14, 16; Acts 1:16..."

"This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in both which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance. That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Savior. ... Wherefore, beloved, seeing ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you; As also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction." (II Peter 3:1, 2, 14 - 16)

"Men and brethren, this scripture must needs have been fulfilled, which the Holy Ghost by the mouth of David spake before concerning Judas, which was guide to them that took Jesus." (Acts 1:16)

In the first grouping of verses, Peter compares the writings of the New Testament, he mentions Paul by name, as equal with the Scripture of the Old Testament. He also equates this with the commandment of Jesus. Thus, he is giving witness that the Scripture is the Words of God.

In the passage from Acts Peter says that the words of David, in Scripture, were not the words of David but had been given Him by the Holy Ghost.

There are "Quotations in the New Testament from the Old Testament [which] prove the Verbal Inspiration of the New Testament writers..."

"Matthew affirmed that the Lord spake through the Prophets of the Old Testament... Matt. 1:22; 2:15..."

"Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying." (Matthew 1:22) "And was there until the death of Herod: that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Out of Egypt have I called my son." (Matt. 2:15)

Matthew attributes the fulfilling of prophecy as fulfilled the Word of the Lord. He even says that the written words of the prophets were "spoken of the Lord."

"Luke affirmed that the Lord spake by the mouth of the Holy Prophets (Luke 1:70)"

"As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets, which have been since the world began." (Luke 1:70)

We might wish to compare this passage with the above passage from Psalm 119:89. We made note that the phrase "settled in Heaven" gave to the Words of Scripture the imprint of eternality. So does this verse from Luke. The prophets were, obviously, not from "since the world began," yet the Words of their writings are given this timeless quality. Therefore, we see, again, that the Words of the Scripture are the Words of God. Those Words even predate the men who wrote them on to the parchment.

"The writer of Hebrews affirms the same thing (Heb. 1:1)"

"God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets." (Hebrews 1:1)

Again, a clear indication that the words which the prophets wrote were actually the Words of God.

"Peter affirmed that the Holy Spirit spake by the mouth of David (Acts 1:16)"

We have already commented on this verse, above. But, again, this is an affirmation that the Words of Scripture are the Words of God.

"Paul’s argument in Gal. 3:16 implies Verbal Inspiration..."

"Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." (Galatians 3:16)

In this verse Paul completely disarms the argument of any who would argue for a "concept inspiration" as opposed to verbal inspiration. Paul goes so far as to argue for the inspiration, and also preservation!, when he takes the inspiration and preservation of the Scripture to the level of individual letters and tense.

"Old Testament writers constantly implied and taught the Divine authority of their very words." In Daniel 12:8 we see that Daniel did not even understand what it was which he had written as the inspired Words of God. "And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things?"

God inspired the Words. Daniel wrote those Words. Yet, Daniel did not understand the words he wrote. A clear indication of the guiding Hand of God upon the manufacture of His inspired text.

We might also note verse nine. "And he said, Go they way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end." It would be impossible for a concept inspiration to preserve these words "till the time of the end" if the Words were not understood. How could the "concept" of a thing not understood be preserved? It could not.

The inspired Words are preserved Words.

"Fulfilled prophecy is proof of Verbal Inspiration." In Isaiah 7:14, God says, "Therefore the Lord himself shall give you a sign; Behold, a virgin shall conceive, and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel." In a famous mistranslation the Revised Standard Bible said "a young woman shall conceive..." The argument of this translation committee was that the word translated "virgin" could also mean "young woman." They apparently applied the prophecy only to the time of Isaiah rather than seeing this as a prophecy of the Birth of the Messiah.

I didn’t say this to heap scorn upon these translators. But, consider that the Holy Spirit translated this verse with a word which can only mean "virgin." Also, He applied this verse as a prophecy of the birth of Jesus.

"Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying, Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us." (Matthew 1:22-23)

Further, to consider this prophecy in the context of our study we must notice that it was the Word of the Lord which spoke by the prophet. Again, Verbal Inspiration.

"Jesus affirmed the Verbal Inspiration of the Scripture... John 10:35..."

"If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken." (John 10:35)

Before we go on with this portion I want to respond to a seeming inconsistency in John 10:34-35. There are some cultist’s who would use this passage to teach that Jesus was a created "god" rather than fully God, Himself. I’m going to reproduce something I wrote on this passage in the "Digging" portion of our blog.

"Here is a passage that many Christians seem to gloss over. It is a little too troubling for them to consider. Jesus seems to be denying His essential Godhood. Some cultists seem to take delight in twisting the words of the Savior in this passage for the same reason.

"What is Jesus saying here? He claims that the Bible calls other’s "God." Actually, He doesn’t claim this. His claim is that the Scripture calls others "god." A small "g" really makes a difference.

"We know that Adam was called a son of God because of his creation by God. We know that the Israelites were called the children of God by right of their special selection to be the people by whom Jesus came into the world. We know that Christians are called sons of God. John 1:12 sets forth this truth.

"In Exodus 4:17 and 7:1 Moses is told to liken himself to God because he is the bearer of the message of God. This is like a traffic stop. The police officer asks me to give him my license and registration. When he does so he speaks in the name of the city, county, or state he represents. This is as Moses did. Jesus could have been referencing these passages when He made His statements to these religious leaders.

"I believe, however, that Jesus was referencing Psalm 82:6, "I have said, Ye are gods, and all of you are children of the most High." In this verse the Psalmist is not speaking of people actually being God; the reference is that their judgements, the rulers and magistrates, were based upon the Laws of God. In the theocratic kingdom of Israel, the highest law was the Law of God. These persons were speaking, in an official capacity, in the place of God unto the people. This is the same principle as above concerning Moses.

"Jesus referenced this Old Testament theme to show the hypocrisy of His accusers.

"Jesus then contrasted these Old Testament persons who stood in the place of God, to render His message, with His Own situation. In verse thirty-eight He did not say He stood in the place of God. He said, "...the Father is in me, and I in him."

"The difference here is between standing as a representative of God, as the Old Testament saints were sometimes allowed to do, and standing AS GOD as Jesus was claiming that He was doing.

"It is hypocrisy to say this of the Old Testament persons, who were only under authority of God, while not saying it - in a more forceful manner - of He Who was, and is, That Very Authority.

"The reaction of the religious leaders is proof that they completely understood what Jesus had said about His Own Deity.

"The fact that He did not correct these men means that He was 1) a liar in that He did not correct their misunderstanding, 2) mentally or emotionally deficient if He believed He were God and was not, or, 3) Very God.

"If either the first or the second had been true it would have rendered Him completely unfit to be either a moral teacher or leader. The same must be said about His religious instruction. But, if number three is correct, He is God. This is a fact with which we must deal. Jesus is God in the flesh.

"The events of Calvary, and the empty tomb, stand as testimony to His truthfulness in this situation.

The salient point of the passage as it affects our present study is that Jesus affirmed that the Scripture cannot fail. In this He affirmed the Verbal Inspiration as He was saying that the Scripture was the Words of God. Man’s words may fail. God’s Words can never fail.

There is one other verse I’d like to reference. "For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled." (Matthew 5:18) In this passage Jesus is claiming inspiration for even the parts of the letters. It’s like dotting an "i" or crossing a "t."

We could also not what this verse says about preservation! One of the proofs of inspiration is preservation. The two go together. God would not have inspired that which He would not preserve. To allege that He would do so is to call in question His purpose for inspiration. He inspired His Words so that humanity would have a pure message from Him. Without full preservation the concept of inspiration is not only meaningless, it is somewhat foolish.

Folks, God ain’t foolish!!

We accessed Galatians 3:16 earlier. But, Schuyler (The Pilgrim Study Bible) has made some very good comments about this passage. "Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ." "The promise to Abraham is found in Gen. 12; that to his seed (Christ) is found in Gen. 22. Paul’s argument is based on the difference between a singular and a plural noun."

This is too fine a distinction to be handled by a "concept inspiration." This argues loudly for Verbal Inspiration. It also argues loudly for preservation.

Chafer (Major Bible Themes) says that the Verbal, Plenary theory of Inspiration holds that the, "...Scripture is ... infallible ... unfailing accurate ... Inerrant..." Such cannot be argued under a theory of a "concept inspiration."

For the Scripture to be infallible, it must understandable. A concept inspiration would lead to a wide variety of interpretation. The interpreter would hold the "Keys to the Kingdom" in that his concept of allegory would hold the day. The Scripture, if not verbally inspired, would be subject to the thoughts of man being the sieve through which the message must pass.

The Scripture cannot be unfailingly accurate unless it is verbally inspired. W. V. Grant, Sr., (From Plow Boy to Preacher Boy) was speaking of a man’s testimony when he said, "...but it did not ring true. It was like a cow that had been too close to a clay root, and gotten red clay in her bell. It did not ring right. It sounded like a hollow tree, or like a counterfeit dollar."

A Scripture which was not verbally inspired, would be like that cow bell. There would be too much of the red clay of human words mingled in for the message of God to "ring true."

Therefore, it is the Verbal, Plenary Theory of Inspiration in which we should be willing to put our trust. This alone gives a strong enough anchor to our faith in God’s Inspired and Preserved Words to man.

In our next session we will begin to look at the meaning of Inspiration.

22 April 2008

THEORIES OF INSPIRATION (Continued)

Having looked at the different theories of inspiration, and having found the Verbal, Plenary Theory to be the most honoring to God and His Book - therefore the correct understanding of the "mechanics" of inspiration, we will now turn our attention to the meaning of inspiration.

We have already discussed that the purpose of inspiration was so that God could explain the unexplainable to humanity. The fact of inspiration is that God reached out to a lost humanity which could have had no concept of the things of eternity and spirit. God did this so that He could communicate with that lost humanity. Through this God was able to make known to humanity His ways and purposes. It is through the medium of His inspired and preserved Book that He allows us to understand the means of salvation which He has offered through the sacrifice of Jesus on the Cross of Calvary.

There are many other "sacred" books. All of these show their own views of man’s place in the universe. Only One Book has the Authority of God stamped upon It by the fact of the inspiration of the Author. The purpose of God’s Book is not so much to show the place of man in the universe; the purpose of God’s Book is to explain the God Who created the universe and to show the responsibilities of man toward Him.

Rowley (Short Dictionary of Bible Themes) says that "Inspiration is the action of the Holy Spirit upon the authors of Scripture to give divine Authority to the books of the Bible."

I would only take issue with Rowley in that those human penmen were not the authors of Scripture. God is the Author of all of Scripture. He used human penmen to write those words which already "settled in Heaven." (see Psalm 119:89)

Although the Spirit of God was, of course, upon those human penmen, they were not themselves inspired. They were "moved" (cf. Hebrews 1:1; II Peter 1:21) by the Holy Spirit; but it was the Words which were inspired of God. Even though delivered to humanity in the language of the human instruments - accessing their vocabularies and tenor of speech - the Words themselves were the Words of God.

The action of the Spirit of God upon the human penmen was such that they would pen the Very Inspired words which God had ordained them to write.

Suppose that I was given a ticket for speeding. The police officer would write the ticket. He would give it to me. He would file it with his daily reports. Still, the ticket would not come from that officer even though he had done all this. That ticket would be issued under the authority of, and in the name of, the municipality under which the police office labored.

That police officer would have no authority to put in any words, or to leave our any words, except those which were mandated to him by the authority under which he labored. Had he taken it upon himself to do so the ticket would be invalidated.

I was working as a court reporter during a military trial. An "Extract of Morning Report" was used as evidence that a man had been absent from his place of service. There was only one tiny error on this extract. It had been dated wrong. That made it invalid. It was not accepted as evidence in a military court of law. The soldier went free.

God’s Words are like that. Had the human penmen have written their own words, those words would not have had the authority of God. Only the Words of God have His Own Authority.

God may use humans to write His Words. Those humans may write in their own vocabulary. They may write in their own language. But, they must write, as the Spirit leads, the Words of God. It is those Words which are inspired.

Again, this makes the fiction of "Concept Preservation" of the Words of God false. His Words are inspired. True, the concept may be drawn from these Words. But the concept may not redistribute the words.

If that police officer above had written "Green Van" in the space marked "Type of Vehicle," the ticket would be invalid. If he wrote "late 1990's" in the space marked "Year of Vehicle," the ticket would be invalid. If he wrote "old and fat guy" in the space marked "Driver," the ticket would be invalid.

All of those former descriptions are too vague. They might be correct but they would not be accurate. God’s Words to humanity are no less precise than is a parking ticket. God said what He meant to say. His inspiration demands that those Words be preserved.

The authority of the Scripture lies in the fact that the Words of God, as inspired by the Holy Spirit, are the Words therein. Any other words do not bear the imprint, or the authority, of God!

Schuyler (A Companion to the New Scofield Reference Bible) says that this inspiration of the Bible shines though the uniqueness of the human writers.

"The Bible composed of all the books of the Old and New Testaments, is the Word of God which, written under the guidance of the Holy Spirit by human instruments whose intelligence, individuality, and literary style were not impaired, is the exact expression of god and, as such, was wholly without error in the original manuscripts."

This use of humans to pen the very Words of God is a very ennobling view of humanity. These human "instruments" were chosen to actually work with God. That is a heady concept. That is a picture of humanity not as a mere creature but as a partner in the workings of God.

This is a picture that the person who is really "sold out" to God is not a robot. We are actually more freely human when we place ourselves in the Hands of God. It is when we are bound in sin, or self, that we have restraints upon our abilities.

In this matter of inspiration of His Words God showed great respect for the individuality of man. He allowed, decreed, that the vocabularies and speech patters of real human persons were allowed to shine forth through the very Words that the Spirit chose for His Own message to humanity.

We are given that same charge, that same opportunity, that same ennobling grace to work with God when it comes to the distribution of the Gospel Message. We can take this message, that Jesus died in time so that others could live in eternity, out into the world. That is our charge and privilege as co-workers with God.

I might make mention here of the phrase "...in the original manuscripts." This is often a phrase used to deny the preservation of God’s Words. Since it was not the penmen, but the Words which were inspired, any faithful copies of those exact Words, in the same order, will be inspired as it would still be the Words of God.

Besides giving the Scripture authority, inspiration also makes the Scripture free from all error.

Unger (Unger’s Bible Handbook) writes that the influence of the Holy Spirit gave us writers who wrote without error. "Inspiration has reference to the influence God exerted over the human authors of the Scripture so that the words and thoughts they recorded in the original autographs were without error..."

Again, the point must be made that the human penmen were not the author’s of Scripture. God was the Author; the human penmen were those who transcribed the Words of God. This is an important distinction about which we must be precise. The Bible is not a book of man. The Bible is The Book of God.

Again that phrase "the original autographs" comes into our discussion. It is true that those original autograph copies were inspired. But, since the inspiration lay upon the Words that inspiration would, by extension, rest upon any faithfully copied manuscript which possessed those same inspired Words.

Meanwhile, no translation, no matter how faithful to the original Words, could possibly be inspired. Since it is a translation, by definition a copy with different words, it does not contain the originally inspired Words. But, that translation could be blessed by God as it gives faithful trust to that which is His Word.

Simmons (A Systematic Study of Bible Doctrine) tells us just how faithful are those inspired Words. "...their [the human writers of Scripture] productions [the inspired Scripture] are as truly and fully the Word of God as any utterance of Jesus."

If the Scriptures are truly inspired of God, and it is fact that they are so inspired, then the Words of the Scripture are of the nature of God. They are eternal. They are powerful. They are glorious. They are perfect. The list could well continue. The point is that these Words are both secure and securing to our souls. We are bound to them in love and fidelity as we are bound to the Savior in love and fidelity.

Many years ago this nation was on "the gold standard." Our money was backed by real gold held in a vault at Ft. Knox. The money was "as good as gold." Such is no longer the case. Our money is now only backed by the full faith and credit of the government.

The Words of Scripture are backed by the Person of God. Those Words of Scripture are backed by His Power and Glory. Those Words of Scripture are repositories of His Power. Those Words are certain and sure. They are powerful and glorious. They are not simply words uttered on the winds of time. The Words of Scripture are eternal and eternally secure Words. They are backed by the full faith and credit of the Governor and Creator of the Universe.

Lindsell (The People’s Study Bible) tells us that the influence of the Holy Spirit gave us, ultimately, the Work of God in the Words of God. "...Scripture has a double authorship, ... The primary author, through whose initiative, prompting and enlightenment, and under whose superintendence, each human write did his work, is God, the Holy Spirit."

Again, I would take issue with the phrase "dual authorship." The Scripture was a work of both the human and the Divine. But, the authorship was all of the Divine. The Holy Spirit is not the "primary author;" He is the Ultimate Author. He may have empowered the human penmen to write down the words of Scripture, but those Words were His Words.

Unger (Unger’s bible Handbook) informs us that the influence of the Holy Spirit gave us the Message full proclaimed, which God has for humanity. "Divine inspiration makes the Bible uniquely the Word of God and not merely a book containing the Word of God."

This fact also argues against the folly of a concept inspiration. God inspired Words. Those Words furnish the concepts rather than the reverse. Therefore, the Words are eternal and trustworthy. The Words are of eternity, as is He Who pronounced these Words, and is not subject to decay in time. Though the heretic may damage some copies, though some copies may be corrupted by sloppy copyist work, God has preserved His inspired Words in the great bulk of the transmitted manuscript evidence.

We will begin our next session with the thought that God prepared the writers to produce His Message.

29 April 2008

THEORIES OF INSPIRATION (Continued)

We look at the Scripture and realize that this is the Words of God. Inspiration tells us why this is a correct concept. The human writers, penmen, wrote down the words; but the Words were the eternally preserved Words of God.

Simmons (A Systematic Study of Bible Doctrine) explains this fact by appealing to the leading of God in the lives of the human penmen.

"Inspiration was accomplished miraculously... God accomplished the miracle of inspiration by providentially preparing the writers for their work and by so revealing His truth to them and so enabling, guiding and Superintending them in the recording of it as to give to us through them the exact and complete transmission of all that He was pleased to reveal."

There were times when God spoke directly to the prophet the Words that were to be written down on parchment. Often God used the men He had prepared for the task. Their life experiences gave them, under the moving of the Spirit upon them, the Words which God would have them to write down.

Jonah 1:17 informs us that God specially prepared a great fish to be used as a means of causing Jonah to fulfill his God given mission. Why should it seem strange that He would use specially prepared men to fulfill their God given mission to transmit the inspired Words of God into the world of humanity?

Simmons also lists several ways in which God used His own methods to prepare the writers.

One of these ways was by "Inspiration through Objective Revelation..." There were times when God simply revealed His will to the human penmen. After His resurrection from the dead the disciples recalled the words of Jesus after He had cleansed the Temple. He had said, "Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise it up." (John 2:19) That was His reply to the religious leaders who questioned by what authority He had cleansed the Temple.

Verse twenty two informs us that the disciples understood this object lesson after His resurrection. There were times that God used this type of object lesson in relating truth.

The word "Objective" can also refer to something that is independent of the mind. God could place the thoughts He wished to convey into the minds of the penmen. This is neither the Illumination Theory nor the Intuition Theory of inspiration in that these were not concepts concocted by the penmen. Neither was this the Dictation Theory in that, although the Words were the exact Words God had inspired, these Words were presented in the language of the penmen.

Again, this is a picture that the Spirit of God moved upon the prophets.

Another of the ways that the inspired Words were transmitted through the prophets was "Inspiration through Supernatural vision..." The Book of Ezekiel gives many instances of this method. So, also, does the Book of Daniel.

Also, there was "Inspiration through Passivity..." Hebrews 1:2 speaks of God speaking "in these last days ... by his Son..." The concept is that of waiting for God to speak. The prophets did not write their own words or on their own agenda. Although this phrase suggests a sort of "meditation," the basic meaning is that the prophets wrote when the Spirit moved them to write. They were passive in their approach, only speaking - in their writing - as God gave utterance.

Further, we could argue from I Corinthians 2:13 ("Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.") that the human penmen would wait for the Spirit to move upon them before they presumed to write.

I can impulsively attempt to do something for God. When I do so I will generally fail. But, when I wait until God impresses me to walk, victory is assured since it is an act done in His time and in His power.

Again, there is "Inspiration through Divine Illumination..." At one point Jesus said that He was ready to go "awaken" Lazarus. The disciples were pleased that Lazarus was sleeping after he had been so sick. "Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead." (John 11:14) There were instances where God illuminated the truths which He wished to be written down. He gave certain leading as to His purposes.

Also, there was "inspiration through God’s direction..." I can think of no greater example of this than the Book of Jonah. Jonah never did seem to agree with God. But, Jonah, finally, faithfully followed the direction of God. A great revival was accomplished because a stubborn man subjugated his will to the Will of God. Jonah followed God’s directive will.

Finally, God used "Inspiration through Subjective Revelation..." John was given very specific revelations in the Book of Revelation. I don’t believe he understood all that about which he wrote. But he did write that which was revealed to him.

Simmons says, "Summing it all up,... The process of inspiration consisted of such means and influences as it pleased God to employ..."

In other words, God simply used that which He choose to use to accomplish the production of His inspired Words into manuscripts available to humanity. We can understand that He did provide us with an inspired and preserved Message. But, in the final analysis, we can never completely - this side of Glory - understand how He accomplished this miracle.

Faith remains the medium of the Christian response to God.

We may want to understand all. I have heard people say that they would believe if God would explain all things to them. He has already, in His inspired and preserved Words, explained all things that are needful for us to understand. We cannot limit God by our own wants, wishes, or desires. His ways are past our ways of understanding.

That is why we call it faith!

There are those today who would argue that we can not have a completely secure Word from God. They argue that this was only possible in the "original manuscripts." This is to make God a God of absurdity. To claim that He inspired what He would know would be lost is to question His intelligence. Folks, we cannot disclaim that which God has claimed. He has claimed to have given us an inspired message.

Either He has, or He hasn’t. If He has given us this inspired message we still have it. If we do not have this inspired message in our day, He was mistaken! I ain’t gonna call Him mistaken!

Inspiration claims that the Bible is the Words of God. Lindsell (The People’s Study Bible) notes the theological, historical and personal contributions of the human penmen and concludes the following. "...the bible regards the human writers as having contributed nothing, and scripture as being entirely the creation of God."

This is truth!

Therefore, the Bible should receive the honor of being just what it is. It is the eternal, unalterable, infinite, preserved Words of God.

Because of this the Bible is qualified to hold our complete trust.

In light of this, we are bound - by the Blood of Jesus - to obey that message which He has given us.

The Bible is inspired, eternally inspired. It is the Words of God for men of all the ages of the world. It is preserved, intact, for us in this day as well. It could not be otherwise because of the inspired power and preservation of God.

In our next session we will begin to examine some of the evidences of inspiration.

Bible Questions Ministries