Introduction
Following the causality of Scripture which directly establishes the divinity thereof, we now turn to the mechanism by which Scripture is made divine although Scripture is written by human authors. There are three main theories of inspiration: verbal plenary, mechanical/dictation, and conceptual. The orthodox hold to the first which will be explained and defended against the other two. Charles Hodge defines inspiration as “an influence of the Holy Spirit on the minds of certain select men, which rendered them the organs of God for the infallible communication of his mind and will.” He concludes from this definition that “what they said [referring to the human authors], God said.”1 I would add just one word and that is ‘immediate’ influence of the Holy Spirit. The genus, then, is an immediate influence of the Holy Spirit. I add immediate to distinguish this from the way the Holy Spirit works mediately through natural secondary causes. Therefore, this action of the Holy Spirit is wholly supernatural, a direct intervention within creation. It is an influence of the Holy Spirit insofar as he is the one bringing about the effect. Next, the specifying difference is on the basis of the subject and intent. The subject of inspiration only belongs to select men as opposed to all mankind or all of the elect which distinguishes this action from things such a common grace, regeneration, sanctification, etc. Regarding the intent, it specifically applies infallibility to the human authors insofar as they communicate the mind and will of God, which distinguishes this operation from any other work of the Spirit. Thus, the definition provided rightly distinguishes inspiration from any other operation of God. The modifiers ‘verbal’ and ‘plenary’ refer to the matter and extent of inspiration respectively. Firstly, inspiration is given to the very words themselves, not merely the concepts or doctrines taught, whereby this view is different from conceptual inspiration. Secondly, inspiration extends to all of Scripture equally. Each book and each part of the books are all inspired by the Holy Spirit to the same degree. This distinguishes the orthodox view of inspiration from partial inspiration. Finally, the way in which the sacred writers are made organs of God is done in a way that preserves the personality of the individual whereby the mechanical theory is condemned. Having distinctly expressed the orthodox view, it will be defended herein.
Verbal Plenary Inspiration Defended against Opposing Views on Inspiration
There are three theses to defend: 1) Inspiration extends to both the Old and New Testaments equally in all their parts, 2) Inspiration is given to the words of Scripture, 3) The way in which the human authors are inspired preserves their humanity. Regarding the first, Scripture is said to be God-breathed (2 Tim. 3:16) which directly applies to the Old Testament since the writing of this by Paul preceded the full formulation of the New Testament. The Greek word ‘theophneustos‘ indicates the divine origin of the category Paul terms as Scripture which is a term used to refer to the whole Old Testament which is proven from Lk. 24:27 where Moses and the prophets (standing for the whole OT) are named as Scripture. Furthermore, when Jesus or NT authors quote the Old Testament, the term Scripture is employed (Mt. 21:42; 22:29; 26:54, 56; Lk. 24:32; Jn. 2:22; 5:39; 10:35, Acts 8:32; 17:2; Rom. 1:2; 10:11; 1 Cor. 15:3; 1 Tim. 5:18). That inspiration also extends to the New Testament is clear since Peter refers to Paul’s writings as Scripture (1 Pet. 3:16). The Greek term ‘graphe‘ is only used across the whole New Testament elsewhere as referring to the Old Testament. Therefore, Peter incorporates Paul’s epistles into the same category by stating “the other Scriptures.” Moreover, Paul quotes the gospel of Luke in 1 Tim. 5:18 under the same category of the other Old Testament quote used (cf. Lk. 10:7). Thus, it is clear that the Old Testament as a whole is under the category of Scripture and that, even while the New Testament was being written, authors recognized other writings as adding to the same category of Scripture.
Moving onto the second thesis, inspiration is given to the words themselves since proper word choice is necessary to signify the correct concepts and ordering thereof in the mind. This is seen in Gal. 3:16 where Paul argues a theological point on the basis of a singular or plural noun word choice. To add, God tells his prophets that he gives the words themselves (Jer. 1:9; Isa. 51:16).
Finally, the personality of and use of rationality by the authors is preserved. The principle grace does not destroy nature holds true here. In using human authors to write the Word of God, God does not thereby override the nature of the individual. He uses their own knowledge, writing styles, ways of thinking, etc., to write down what he desires to be revealed. Such diversity of personalities is clearly seen in comparing Paul and John’s writings. While Paul writes in complex Greek sentences, in long argumentation, with extensive Old Testament quotations, John writes more simply and is repetitive. Paul’s own personal identity effects what he writes; and therefore, he appeals to his Hebrew identity, pharisaical upbringing, and his Damascus road experience. The way Paul experienced Jesus as resurrected and glorified is different from the perspective John had being his closest disciple which is reflected in their writing. To give another example of personality, Luke was never an eyewitness to Jesus; and therefore did not write like one, but rather he collected eyewitness accounts. However, John wrote as a person who saw Jesus face to face. So, divine inspiration does not abstract a human from his personality or experiences, but rather utilizes it to more fully reveal God.
Objections
The objections to this view of inspiration can be divided into arguments in principle or arguments from evidence. In the former, atheists, who deny any existence of the supernatural, must necessarily conclude that inspiration is false. This is an objection to the ontic principle of theology which will be demonstrably proven at the beginning of theology proper. Also in this category are the agnostics and deists, who object to revelation as a whole, namely the epistemic principle of theology, and by consequence deny any inspired writings. In proving the divinity/authority of Scripture, this will be dismantled as well. These arguments rest on the denial of God or his personal communication of himself which in principle denies inspiration. Others argue from the writings themselves that it cannot be inspired by bringing up supposed contradictions or inconsistencies within the canon. This will be answered under the loci of inerrancy wherein seeming contradictions within Scripture will be resolved. Finally, people from the partial inspiration camp may argue from 1 Cor. 7 that the whole of Scripture is not inspired. Paul says, “To the rest I say (1, not the Lord),” “I have no command from the Lord,” and “Yet in my judgment” (vv. 12, 25, 40). They argue that Paul is speaking from a merely human perspective under no unction from the Spirit. However, Paul attaches two qualifiers to the last two statements saying, “but I give my judgment as one who by the Lord’s mercy is trustworthy,” and “I think that I too have the Spirit of God” (vv. 25, 40). In the context of this passage, Paul is giving authoritative commands that the Corinthian church must follow, and he derives this authority to do so by appealing to the Lord’s mercy and the Holy Spirit. Thus, when Paul says he does not have these commands from the Lord, he means that there is no record or immediate revelation from Jesus incarnate of these things, not that it is less inspired or as authoritative. As an apostle, Paul has the authority from Christ himself to teach the church and these teachings are not excluded from such authority.
Conclusion
All of the properties of Scripture to be discussed in future articles falls upon this point. Inspiration, which is the way in which God made his Word divine, is necessary for the divinity of Scripture, and the divinity of Scripture is necessary for its authority, sufficiency, efficacy, etc. Recapping what we have laid out on the topic of Scripture, it is the necessary epistemic principle of supernatural theology which is defined as written supernatural revelation. Scripture is written by God through human authors who were inspired by the Holy Spirit which contains divine truth in written form unto the edification and salvation of the elect. We will proceed by defining the authority and authenticity of Scripture and give the associated proof thereof. There are also many other properties of Scripture such as sufficiency, perspicuity, and efficacy, that we will address.
- Charles Hodge, Systematic Theology, vol. 1 (Wm. B. Publishing Company: Grand Rapids, 1995), 154. ↩︎