THE HOLY SCRIPTURE
2004
LESSON THREE
I. The Relation of the Holy Ghost to the Holy Writers (p. 228, et.seq.)
A. “Moderns”
1. Speak as if this relationship were left indeterminate.
2. Present it as a “difficult problem”.
3. Look for a formula to express the “divine-human” character of Scripture.
4. Grant the possibility of “minor discrepancies”.
5. Many are ready to abandon idea of inspiration.
6. Clearly attempt to “muddy the clear waters”.
B. Facts are clear, e.g.:
1. Ps 19:7.
2. Ps 119:105.
3. Mt 1:22.
4. Lk 1:70.
5. 1Co 14:37.
6. 1Th 2:13.
C. Truth is:
1. God employed the writers as His instruments in order that men might have His Word fixed in writing.
2. Men called (in the Church Fathers and Lutheran dogmaticians) clerks, secretaries, hands, pens, of the Holy Spirit.
3. Must note the mere instrumentality.
D. The writers:
1. Were not lifeless machines.
2. Were living, personal instruments.
3. Were endowed with intellect and will.
4. Were equipped with their own distinct style.
5. God:
a. Carefully preserved their lives (did not first “dehumanize” them).
b. And, their genuine human way of expressing themselves.
c. In other that they might be understood by men.
6. They were not:
a. In a state of trance.
b. Without consciousness and unwitting.
7. They wrote voluntarily, willingly and knowingly.
II. Objections to the Doctrine of Inspiration (p. 232 et.seq.)
A. Extremely sad chapter.
1. As harmful as objections to satisfactio vicaria of Christ.
2. A destruction of the foundation of the Christian Church.
3. Eph 2:20.
B. Arguments against inspiration include:
1. The different style in the various books in Scripture.
a. There is a diversity of style.
b. But does not contradict inspiration.
c. Rather is demanded by it.
d. God spoke through them, each with own distinctive style.
e. Why not use His own divine style?
(1) He could not use His own heavenly style.
(2) It is a celestial style, unsuited to men on earth.
(3) 2Co 12:3,4.
(4) We will someday understand the celestial style.
f. Eph 6:16,17.
2. The appeal of the holy writers to their historical research has been advanced against inspiration.
a. e.g. Lk 1:3 and 1Co 1:11.
b. Answer like one re: “style”.
c. Holy Spirit also used their historical knowledge acquired by their own experience or research or communications from others.
d. Ac 2:4.
e. The experience of writer’s heart does not cancel the inspiration – 2Sa 23:1,2.
3. The variant readings found in the copies of the originals are said to disprove the doctrine.
a. Variant readings in the copies do exist.
b. But, we have never held that the copyists were inspired.
c. Spelling mistakes or slips or attempted corrections have nothing to do with the inspiration of the originals.
d. Some then say that variants makes it uncertain which is the original Word of God.
e. But truth is we do have a reliable Bible text:
(1) We know we have this Word prior to any human investigation on the basis of the divine promise.
(a) Jn 17:20.
(b) Jn 8:31,32.
(c) Mt 28:20.
(d) Jn 10:35.
(e) Satan did not argue on basis of variant readings (Mt 4).
(2) Reach same result on the basis of scientific investigation.
(a) Not a single doctrine rendered doubtful on any point by the “legion” of variant readings.
(b) Compare Wescott and Hort or Nestle with textus receptus of Erasmus in 16th century.
(c) Remember the same doctrine is set down in several, usually in numerous places.
(d) Php 3:1.
4. Alleged contradictions in Scripture and erroneous statements in general are stressed particularly.
a. But if only there is some readiness to come to an understanding, the possibility of harmonizing the seemingly contradictory statements can be easily shown.
b. No fair minded person can ask more.
c. Even a possible explanation is sufficient to meet the objector.
d. It is a work of supererogation to show that a particular explanation is real solution, but is never necessary.
e. Harmonist has done his job if can show a reasonable explanation.
f. If we can discover no way of adjusting difference, we leave the matter in abeyance. (Jn 10:35 again).
5. A whole series of real or merely assumed facts has been advanced against inspiration.
a. e.g. “inaccurate quotations” from Old Testament (e.g. Romans, 24 out of 47 can be classified literal).
b. But intended sense of Old Testament is none other than one expressed in New Testament.
c. Rule is that the same Spirit of Christ is One speaking in Old Testament and New Testament.
d. He has the authority to use His own words as He chooses!
e. Old Testament prophecies (the future); New Testament expounds the prophecies (the fulfillment).
f. Some argue the “trivialities” impeach the inspiration.
(1) But faithfulness in small matters is decidedly proper and necessary.
(2) Lk 16:10.
(3) Ro 15:4.
(4) Nothing is so lowly about a believer that it does not please God.
g. Others make much of “barbarisms”, faulty sentence construction and the like.
(1) Re: “Solecisms” (violation of grammatical rules): Wrong; used koinē Greek – the world language at that time!
(2) Re: “Barbarisms” (deviations from classical Greek): He spoke with the language He chose!
(3) Re: “Hebraisms”: New Testament is fulfillment of the Old Testament!
(4) Re: “faulty constructions of Paul”: used when will contribute to the clarity or help add proper stress.
(5) Re: passages allegedly contradicting inspiration:
(a) e.g. 1Co 7:10,12,25.
(b) Paul’s own word is only advice, not the Lord’s command (Christian liberty).
(c) But not distinguishing between inspired and non-inspired.
(d) 1Co 1:16: Inspiration did not make writers infallible or omniscient as to their past lives.
Copyright © 2004 CrossTies Counseling
Ministries, Inc.
All Rights Reserved
