Types of inspiration and guidelines for supposed contradictions
Introduction
1) Scriptures which indicate that the Bible is from God
A) II Samuel 23:2; Spirit spoke by men and His word was on there tongue
B) Acts 1:16; Spirit spoke by the mouth of men
C) I Cor. 2:12-13; The things spoken were in words taught by the Spirit
D) II Peter 1:20-21; Holy men spake as they were moved by the Spirit
E) II Timothy 3:16-17; All scripture given by the inspiration of God
2) We are not told exactly how this was accomplished
A) We can search in vain to identify a passage that explicitly tells us how
this process worked.
B) God simply has not spelled out the details on how His Spirit entered into the
Minds of the writers and how He worked with their hands as they wrote.
C) We must be content with these and other similar statements.
D) The point is that the work produced was God’s word, not man’s.
3) Many different ideas concerning inspiration
A) There are several different ideas concerning the inspiration of the Bible.
B) Different men believe in different levels of inspiration.
4) On the subject of contradictions that are claimed.
A) If the Bible is from God we would expect there to be no contradictions.
B) There are those who claim that the Bible does in fact have contradictions.
C) Therefore the Bible is the work of man and not God.
D) Can the Bible be defended in this regard? Yes it can, if we remember a few
Items that must be considered.
I) Inspiration
1) There are several ideas about inspiration
A) Universal (Naturalistic) Inspiration
1) This theory holds that the Bible is inspired only in the sense that the
writers and artists are “inspired” when they produce great works of
literature, music, or art.
2) This is the theory that men are inspired in the sense that they are
exceptionally talented, such as Shakespeare, Milton, Beethoven, etc..
3) This theory holds that the Bible is just like any book.
4) It holds that God just gave the authors an unusual ability to convey their
thoughts and that the Bible is a human book without any divine
guidance.
5) This is not really inspiration at all. It may be rightly called “natural
genius”, but not inspiration.
B) Reasons to reject
1) It makes liars of the writers who claimed that the source of their
writings were from God. If they were natural geniuses, then their
claims would, of necessity, be false. This would call into question
the whole theory. We do not attribute the characteristic of genius to
liars, coning, crafty, indignant, low, etc... but never as genius.
2) The biblical documents are vastly superior to the ablest productions of
men. This is conceded by all. The Bible Displays superior knowledge
in all aspects such as history, morality, objectivism, etc... then any other
book we have access to.
3) It leaves the unity of the Bible as an inexplicable mystery.
4) If the Bible was the result of natural genius, modern genius would
have made it obsolete, instead, the Bible still remains.
C) Thought (Dynamic of Concept) Inspiration
1) This view asserts that the “thoughts” of men are inspired, but not the
words.
2) In this view the important thing is that great spiritual truths be conveyed
to the reader, it really does not matter what words are used, or even
whether the words described events that actually occurred.
D) Reasons to reject this theory
1) The human authors may have understood only partially what God was
revealing to them, and in restating it in their own words they may have
interjected considerable error.
2) It is possible to convey precise thought and ideas only by using precise
words. If words are unimportant, then the thoughts, which come from
the words, are entirely subjective.
3) What good are infallible thoughts if they are channeled through fallible
words. One can no more have ideas without words that he can have a
tune without notes or a sum without figures.
4) Question, why do Biblical scholars do word studies yet deny that the
words are inspired? If the words are not inspired, then it really matters
not what there meaning.
5) There are volumes of books written to identify the true meaning of the
text. Yet we have non on Shakespear.
E) Neo-Orthodox Inspiration
1) While not necessarily denying that divine elements exist in the writing
of Scripture, this view holds that there are errors in the Bible and thus
the Bible cannot be taken literally as true.
2) This theory holds that God speaks through the Scriptures and uses them
as a means by which to communicate truth to us.
3) The Bible becomes a channel of divine revelation much as a beautiful
flower communicate the concept that God is the Creator.
4) The Bible under this theory becomes true only as it is comprehended
and truth is realized by the reader.
5) The history of this view demonstrates that no two advocates exactly
agree as to what the Bible actually teaches. This view leaves the
individual as the final authority concerning what is true and what is
false.
F) Reasons to reject
1) This theory is basically the same as partial inspiration in the fact that
it leaves the individual in charge.
2) With this view, we have no authority in spiritual matters.
3) This claim goes against what the Bible claims for itself and also puts
Christ in the hot seat (John 12:48).
G) Encounter Inspiration (Pietism)
1) This theory holds that the Bible is a vehicle of revelation but is not
itself a divine revelation. It becomes inspired when it inspires the
reader.
2) It may well be the medium through which a person encounters God
in an act of faith, but it is a human document, and as such it is subject
to human error throughout.
3) It is based upon the theory that individual feeling or experience is of the primary importance.
4) This seems to be an attempt at avoiding the cold orthodoxy of
Protestant Scholasticism (adherence to the Scriptures through study)
H) Reasons to reject
1) This theory opened the door to the dangerous enemy of subjective
experientialism (belief based upon experience and not on objective
truth).
2) One must have as much faith in the encounter as the Christian has in
the scriptures.
3) One generation will recall upon their individual experience to stablish
their faith and evangelize others. The next generation will stress the
need for individual experience without any Biblical authority to backup
their belief. The next generation in turn will question individual
experience since they have forsaken any doctrinal standard.
4) In turn, unanswered questions would demand some kind of authority.
5) When Scripture is neglected, human reason or subjective experience
fills the need as the required standard.
6) Scripture has now lost all of its authoritative power.
I) Dictation (Mechanical) Inspiration
1) This is the view that God used the authors as mechanical stenographers.
2) God dictated every word, every punctuation mark, every letter, etc...
3) The authors simply were tools that God used to put His words down on
paper.
J) Reasons to reject
1) If this theory is correct, then the style of the writings would be the same
throughout. Yet this is not what we find. A simple reading of the texts
shows the personality and style of each of the authors. This is fact. A
perfect example of this in the controversy over Mark 16:9-20 which
is questioned because it seems that the style is different from the rest of
the book.
2) In many instances the authors express their own fears and feelings, they
express their private prayers for God’s help, or in a host of other ways
interject their own personalities into the Divine record.
K) Verbal, Plenary Inspiration
1) This is the correct view. It holds that what men wrote was exactly
what God wanted them to write, without errors or mistakes, yet with
their own personalities in evidence in their writings.
2) “Verbal” means that every word in the Bible is there because God
permitted it by the direction of the Spirit.
3) “Plenary” means each and every part of the Bible is inspired, with
nothing having been omitted.
4) By employing this terminology, God ensured that the writings were
correct and consistent with His will.
5) This view holds that men wrote exactly what God wanted them to write,
without errors or mistakes, yet with their own individual characteristics
in evidence. While the books of the Bible reflect the writer’s
personalities as expressed in the human element that often is fo evident,
it was only by this process of inspiration that God could convey,
objectively and accurately, His word for mankind.
L) Reason to accept
1) Matt. 4:4, we are to leave by every word that proceeds out of the mouth
of God. In reciting these OT passages, Jesus employed the Greek
perfect tense of “It is written” which denotes completed action with
abiding results. Thus He declared that God’s words were written and
remain so.
2) Matt. 5:17-18; Jesus affirmed this view. A “jot” was the smallest Heb.
letter, and the “tittle” was the tiny projection on certain Heb. letters.
When He employed these specific terms as examples, He affirmed the
the minutest accuracy for the whole of the OT.
3) Matt. 22:23-33; Jesus in His discussion with the Sadducees about their
denial of the resurrection of the dead, He referred to Ex. 3:6 wherein
God sais to Moses: “I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac,
and the God of Jacob.” When God spoke these words, Abraham had
been dead for almost 400 years, yet He still said, “I am the God of
Abraham.” As Jesus correctly pointed out, “God is not the God of the
dead, but of the living” (Matt. 22:32). Thus, Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob must have been living. The only way they could be living was if
their spirits continued to survive the death of their bodies. That kind
of conscious existence implies a future resurrection of the body, the
very point Jesus was making. Of interest is the fact that His entire
argument rested on the tense of a single verb.
4) The same kind of reliance upon a single word is expressed by Paul
in Gal. 3:16. The force of his argument rests upon the number of
the noun (singular, as opposed to plural).
5) In John 8:58, Jesus, in attempting to impress upon the Jews His
eternal nature, He once again based His argument on the tense of
a single verb.
II) Supposed Contradictions Guidelines
1) If the Bible is from God then it cannot be in error
A) God cannot error; Heb. 6:18, Titus 1:2, God cannot lie
B) God is truth; John 14:6
C) God is faithful; II Timothy 2:13
2) If the Bible is from God and it is inspired verbally and plenary inspired, yet has errors
then something is amiss. Either God is not what He says He is, or the Bible is not
what it claims to be.
3) The Bible is without mistake, but the critics are not. All their allegations of errors in
the Bible are based on some error of their own. Their errors fall into one of the
following categories.
4)Mistake # 1: Assuming that the unexplained is not explainable
A) No informed person can make the claim to be able to fully explain all of
the supposed contradictions in the Bible.
B) Yet, it is a mistake for the critic to assume that what has not been explained
will never be explained.
C) A perfect example of this is the work of the scientist. When they come across
an anomaly in nature, they do not throw up their hands and give up on further
investigation. The unexplained is their motivation in investigating the
matter further.
5) Mistake #2: Presuming the Bible guilty until proven innocent
A) Many critics assume the Bible to be in error until something proves it right,
B) Like any American citizen charged with an offence, The Bible should be
presumed innocent until proven guilty. This is how we approach all human
communications. If we did not, life would not be possible.
1) If we assume traffic signs to be in error, we would probably be dead
before we proved them right.
2) If we assume food labels to be in error until proven right, we would
have to open every can and package before buying them.
3) We base our acceptance of the truth of traffic signs and food labels
faith. Faith is simply the belief in the veracity of the testimony
given. We believe, in faith, that traffic signs are correct because
others have done the leg work. We believe, in faith, that the food
labels are correct because the manufacturer has given their
testimony as to the truthfulness of the label.
4) The same is true with the Bible.
C) The Bible, like any other book, should be presumed to be telling us what
the authors said and heard. Negative critics of the Bible begin with just the
opposite presumption.
6) Mistake #3: Confusing our fallible interpretation with God’s infallible revelation
A) Humans are fallible beings and therefore make mistakes. This is why there
are such things as pencil erasers, correction fluid, and a delete key.
B) God is infallible, therefore it is without mistake (mistake #2)
C) As long as fallible humans exist, there will be misinterpretation of the Bible.
D) In view of this, we should not be hasty in assuming that a currently held
dominant view in science is the final word on the topic. Prevailing views
of science in the past are considered errors by the scientists of today.
E) This is self evident.
7) Mistake #4: Failing to understand the context of the passage
A) This is the most common mistake that happens. A person takes a text out
of context. A text out of context is pretext. The idea is to not find the
truth, but to try to assert the preconceived idea that the Bible is mistaken.
They have come to the Bible with the dogmatic notion that it is false.
Therefore, they make this common mistake.
B) This type of mistake also happens to those who believe in the Bible. They
to have a preconceived idea and try to interpret the scriptures based upon
their preconceived idea.
C) Example: Matt. 5:20-26 and Matt. 23:13-36
1) In Matt. 5 we have stating that one who calls his brother a fool shall
be in danger of hell (Gehenna) fire.
2) In chapter 23 we have Jesus himself calling those scribes fools.
3) Seems to be a contradiction. Those who are critical of the Bible state
that this is a clear contradiction since those in the eternal Gehenna
are those who have sinned and suffered the judgement of God. As
we know from Heb. 4:15 that Jesus did no sin, therefore He is not in
danger of the eternal Gehenna.
4) Some state that Matt. 5 indicates that we can never call someone a
fool. If we do then we are also in danger of the eternal Gehenna.
The answer to Matt. 23 that is given is that Jesus, being God, could
call people fools and not be in danger. Yet there is no scriptural
support for this claim.
5) The answer is in the context of the two passages. In Matt. 5 the context
is in calling someone a fool from the emotion of anger without cause
(Matt. 5:22), this would be an unrighteous use of the word. In Matt. 23,
Jesus is condemning those that sit in the seat of Moses and that they
abuse this power for their own glory (Matt. 23:1-12). Jesus had a cause
that cause was the fact that they did not the things that they required
of the people.
D) The teaching is in the fact that if we call someone a fool out of anger without
a cause, we are in danger and need to repent and ask for God’s forgiveness. Yet
we are at liberty to call someone a fool if we have just cause (PS. 14:1).
8) Mistake #5: Neglecting to interpret difficult passages in the light of clearer ones
A) Some passages are hard to understand. Sometimes the difficulty is due to
obscurity. At other times, it is because passages appear to be teaching
something contrary to what some other passage is clearly teaching.
B) Example
1) I John 1:8; “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves,
and the truth is not in us.
2) I John 3:9; “Whosoever is born of God doth not sin; for his seed
remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.”
C) This would seem to be contradictory in nature.
D) Explanation
1) John is writing to Christians I John 1:1-3
2) John states that Christians have sin in verse #8
3) Yet in verse 9, he declares that the Christian doth not sin.
4) Verse 9 seems to be the difficult one. Yet if we remember context
we can come to an answer.
5) To help we have to look at verse #7, “But if we walk in the light as He
is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of
Jesus Christ his son cleanseth us from all sin.”
6) The meaning is that the child of God does not continually practice
sin. This is what is meant by walking in the light. The child of God
continually works their life to follow Christ. The sinner does no
such thing.
7) If a pig and a lamb fall into the mud, the pig wants to stay there, but
the lamb wants to get out. Both a Christian and a nonchristian can
fall into sin, but the Christian cannot stay in it and feel comfortable.
9) Mistake #6: Basing a teaching on an obscure passage.
A) Some passages are difficult because their meanings are obscure. This is
usually because a key word is used only once or very rarely so that it is
difficult to know what the author is saying, unless it can be inferred from
the context.
B) Matt. 6:11; “Give us this day our daily bread.”
1) The word in question is the one translated “daily”
2) Experts in Greek still have not come to any agreement either on
its origin, or on its precise meaning.
3) Some of the suggestions are as follows
a) Give us this day our continuos bread
b) Give us this day our supersubstantial bread (indicating
supernatural).
c) Give us this day bread for our sustenance.
d) Give us this day our daily (what we need for today) bread.
4) Each has its defenders, and each one is a possibility based on the
limited information available.
5) There does not seem to be any compelling reason to depart from
what has become the generally accepted translation, but this
example does serve to illustrate the point.
C) When we are unsure, several things must be kept in mind.
1) We should never build a doctrine on an obscure passage. The old
saying goes ‘ The main things are the plain things’. If something
is important, it will be clearly taught in scripture, and in more than
one place.
2) When a passage is not clear, we should never conclude that it means
something that is opposed to another plain teaching.
10) Mistake #7; Forgetting that the Bible is a human book with human characteristics
A) Remember that scripture is not dictation.
B) The writers had their own unique styles.
C) It manifests human perspectives
1) David wrote from a shepherd’s. Psalm 23
2) Kings wrote from a prophetic vantage.
3) Chronicles from a priestly standpoint
D) It contains human interests
1) Hosea possessed a rural interest
2) Luke a medical interest
3) James a love of nature
E) Forgetting the humanity of scripture can lead to falsely impugning its integrity
by expecting a level of expression higher than that which is customary to a
human document.
11) Mistake #8; Assuming that a partial report is a false report
A) Critics often jump to the conclusion that a partial report is false.
B) However, this is not so. If it were, most of what has ever been written
would be false, since seldom does time or space allow a complete
report.
C) On occasions, the Bible expresses the same thing in different ways, or
at least from different viewpoints, at different times.
D) Hence, inspiration does not exclude a diversity of expression. The four
gospels relate the same story in different ways to different people, and
sometimes even quote the same saying with different words.
1) Matt. 16:16; “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
2) Mark 8:29; “Thou art the Christ”
3) Like 9:20; “The Christ of God”
E) The 10 commandments that were written with the finger of God are
stated with variation. (Ex. 20:8-11; Deut. 5:12-15)
12) Mistake #9; Demanding that NT citations of the OT always be exact
A) Critics often point to variation in the NT’s use of the OT passages
as a proof of error.
B) Variations in the NT citation of the OT fall into different categories
1) Change of speaker
a) Zech. 12:10; “and they shall look upon ME whom they
have pierced,”
b) John 19:37; “They shall look on HIM whom the pierced.”
c) The difference is simple. In Zech. It is the Lord who is
speaking. This can be determined by the use of the word
I which is used in the preceding verses describing what
God will do. In John it is john who is talking.
2) Other times writers only cite part of the OT text.
a) Jesus quotes Isa. 61:1-2 in Luke 4:18-19 yet He stopped
in the middle of the sentence.
b) Had He gone any further, He could not have said what He
said in verse 21 of Luke “This day is this scripture fulfilled
in your ears.” For the very next phrase from Isaiah “the day
of vengeance of our God,” which refers to His second coming.
3) Sometimes the NT paraphrases of summarizes the OT
a) Matt. 2:6; Micah 5:2
b) Matt. Said Jesus moved to Nazareth “that it might be fulfilled
which was spoken by the prophets, He shall be called a
Nazarene.” Notice, Matt. Quotes no given prophet, but rather
“prophets” in general. It is futile to insist on a specific OT text
where this could be found.
13) Mistake #10; Assuming that divergent accounts are false ones
A) Just because two or more accounts of the same event differ, it does not
mean that they are in error.
1) Matt. 28:5;”And the angel answered and said unto the women,”
2) John 20:12; “And seeth two angels in white sitting,”
B) These are not contradictory reports. In fact, where there is two there is
always one.
C) Matt. did not say there was ONLY one angel. One has to add the word
“only” to Matt.’s account to make it contradict John’s.
14) Mistake #11; Presuming that the Bible approves of all it records
A) It is a mistake to assume that everything contained in the Bible is
commanded by the Bible.
B) The whole Bible is true (John 17:17)
C) It records some lies (Gen 3:4; John 8:44)
D) Inspiration encompasses the Bible fully and completely in the sense
that it records accurately and truthfully even the lies and errors of sinful
beings.
E) The truth of scripture is found in what the Bible REVEALS, not in everything
it records.
F) Unless this distinction is held, it may be incorrectly concluded that the Bible
teaches immorality because it narrates David’s sin (II Sam. 11:4), that it
promotes polygamy because it records Solomon’s (I Kings 11:3), or that it
affirms atheism because it quotes the fool saying “there is no God” (Ps. 14:1)
15) Mistake #12; Assuming that round numbers are false
A) Another mistake made by the critics is claiming that round numbers as
false.
B) This is not so, round numbers are just that, round numbers.
C) We should not expect for a prescientific age people to use today’s precise
measurements. In fact, this is never put forth of any other ancient work.
16) Mistake #13; Neglecting to note that the Bible uses different literary devices.
A) The bible reveals a number of literary devices.
1) Several books are written in poetic form (Job, Psalms, Proverbs)
2) The Gospels are filled with parables
3) In Gal. 4, Paul utilizes an allegory
4) The NT abounds with metaphors (II Cor. 3:2-3; James 3:6)
5) It uses similes (Matt. 20:1; James 1:6)
6) It uses hyperboles (Col. 1:23; John 21:25)
7) Satire (Matt. 19:24 with 23:24)
B) It is not a mistake for the Bible to use a figure of speech, but it is a
mistake for a reader to take a figure of speech literally.
17) Mistake #14; Forgetting that only the original text, not every copy is without error
A) When critics do come upon a genuine mistake in a manuscript copy,
make another fatal error, they assume it was in the original inspired text.
B) They often forget that God only uttered the original text of the Bible and not
the copies.
C) Example
1) II Kings 8:26; “Two and twenty two years old was Ahaziah,”
2) II Chron. 22:2; “Rory and two years old was Ahazial,”
3) The later number cannot be correct, or he would have been older than
his father. This is obviously a copyist error.
D) Several things need to be observed about copyist errors
1) They are errors in the copies, not the originals
2) They are minor errors which do not effect any doctrine of the faith.
3) The errors are relatively few in number.
4) Usually by the context, or by another scripture, we know which one
is in error.
18) Mistake # 15; Confusing general statements with universal ones
A) Critics often jump to the conclusion that unqualified statements admit of
no exceptions. They seize upon verses that offer general truths and then point
with glee to obvious exceptions. In doing so, they forget that such statements
are only intended to be generalizations.
B) Proverbs 16:7; “When a man’s ways please the Lord, he maketh even his
enemies to be at peace with him.” It affirms that when a man’s ways please
the Lord, He makes even his enemies to be at peace with him. This
obviously was not intended to be a universal truth. Paul was pleasing to
the Lord and his enemies stoned him (Acts 14:19). Jesus was pleasing to
the Lord yet His enemies crucified Him. Nonetheless, it is a general truth
that one who acts in a way pleasing to God can minimize his enemies’
antagonism.
III) Conclusion
1) Many people for many years have studied this aspect of the Bible. One can only
conclude that those who think they have discovered a mistake in the Bible do not
know too much about the Bible, they know too little.
2) This does not mean that we understand all the difficulties in the Bible
3) Will we ever, maybe, yet to date every difficulty that has been addressed by the
critic has been dealt with in a satisfactory manner. The Bible has come out on
top.
A) This, of course, does not mean that the critic will accept the conclusion that
given.
B) Remember that they are searching for something, anything, to show the Bible
to be false.
4) One other thing to remember. When confronted by someone that states that there are
contradictions in the Bible, simply ask them to show you one. 9 times out of 10, they
will not be able to because they personally have not seen one. They have only heard
that there are.
No comments:
Post a Comment