God's Inspiration of the Bible

[rlvaughn]

In the past two weeks, Kevin Bauder has written two blog posts about inspiration. Here are some excerpts.

When people think about the inspiration of the Bible, they tend to imagine it as a process. They think of inspiration as a way of stating how the Bible got to be what it is. Trying to answer the how question is one of the reasons that we are surrounded by so-called “theories of inspiration.”

The verse [2 Timothy 3:16] contains two adjectives: inspired and profitable. This is the point at which a problem arises. Are both adjectives to be understood as predicates of every scripture? Or is inspired a qualifier that narrows the scope of the scripture that is in view? In other words, should the verse be translated, “Every scripture is inspired and profitable,” or should it be translated, “Every inspired scripture is profitable”?

Since inspiration applies to the writings, not the writers, then it must involve the words. One cannot have writings without words, sentences, grammar, and syntax. If the writings are inspired, then all these matters are included within the orbit of inspiration. This teaching is sometimes called verbal inspiration.

According to 2 Timothy 3:16, all scripture is God-breathed or inspired. In other words, inspiration applies to the scriptures themselves, not to the process by which they were produced. The word inspired is a result word, not a process word. The writers were not inspired. The thoughts were not inspired. The various activities in which the biblical authors engaged while preparing to write were not inspired. Scripture itself was God-breathed, and that is what inspiration means.

In other words, every scripture has two authors: a human and a divine. God is fully and completely the author of every word of scripture, but so is each human author of the text. The true humanity of the authors is on full display as each exhibits unique interests and writes in a unique style. The divine authorship of scripture is also on full display, as every word comes with the full authority of God.

These excerpts, which may or may not accurately reflect to you where he is going with his explanation, are made to pique your interest. It will be best to read both articles to understand his position. They are here:

• Inspiration
• The Holy Spirit and Production of Scripture

How would you interact with Bauder’s explanation of inspiration? Is he right about “process”? Is his definition of inspiration correct?

 

[SavedByGrace]

I start with, "In other words, every scripture has two authors: a human and a divine". If this is correct, then the Holy Bible cannot be "the Word of God", but "the Word of God and man". Both, in 2 Tim 3:13, where Paul uses "θεοπνευστος", and 2Peter 1:21, where Peter uses, "φερομενοι"; both words are in the passive voice. John Trapp in his commentary explains this excatly as it is:

"As they were moved] φερομενοι. Forcibly moved, acted, carried out of themselves to say and do what God would have them"

The Bible has ONE Author, God the Holy Spirit, Who dictated to the writers what they should write, as He did with Jeremiah, etc

 

[Yeshua1]

I start with, "In other words, every scripture has two authors: a human and a divine". If this is correct, then the Holy Bible cannot be "the Word of God", but "the Word of God and man". Both, in 2 Tim 3:13, where Paul uses "θεοπνευστος", and 2Peter 1:21, where Peter uses, "φερομενοι"; both words are in the passive voice. John Trapp in his commentary explains this excatly as it is:

"As they were moved] φερομενοι. Forcibly moved, acted, carried out of themselves to say and do what God would have them"

The Bible has ONE Author, God the Holy Spirit, Who dictated to the writers what they should write, as He did with Jeremiah, etc

The Holy Spirit made sure what they recorded down was the very word of God, but they were not robots, being dictated to by Him!

 

[Yeshua1]

In the past two weeks, Kevin Bauder has written two blog posts about inspiration. Here are some excerpts.

These excerpts, which may or may not accurately reflect to you where he is going with his explanation, are made to pique your interest. It will be best to read both articles to understand his position. They are here:

• Inspiration
• The Holy Spirit and Production of Scripture

How would you interact with Bauder’s explanation of inspiration? Is he right about “process”? Is his definition of inspiration correct?

Would agree with the general premise that you outlined here for us!

 

[SavedByGrace]

The Holy Spirit made sure what they recorded down was the very word of God, but they were not robots, being dictated to by Him!

Either the Bible is THE Word of God 100% Or it is a joint product of God and man. Which is it?

 

[SavedByGrace]

The Holy Spirit made sure what they recorded down was the very word of God, but they were not robots, being dictated to by Him!

Can you explain the use of the passive in both verses that I have quoted

 

[Yeshua1]

Either the Bible is THE Word of God 100% Or it is a joint product of God and man. Which is it?

men wrote what the Holy Spirit inspired and moved them to do, God did not write the Bible as he did the 10 Commandments to Moses!

 

[Yeshua1]

Can you explain the use of the passive in both verses that I have quoted

What do you mean by "dictated?"

 

[SavedByGrace]

What do you mean by "dictated?"

Read John Trapp in #2 which is exactly what the passive voice says

 

[Yeshua1]

Read John Trapp in #2 which is exactly what the passive voice says

They still used their own style and vocabulary, as the Lord does not cookie cut out each writer of scriptures from same mold!

 

[SavedByGrace]

They still used their own style and vocabulary, as the Lord does not cookie cut out each writer of scriptures from same mold!

The actual words are from the Holy Spirit, He told them what to write and how to write. The Writers were instrumental in their work. It is like God putting the words into the mouth of Jeremiah. If He did so with him then why not the whole Bible?

 

[Yeshua1]

The actual words are from the Holy Spirit, He told them what to write and how to write. The Writers were instrumental in their work. It is like God putting the words into the mouth of Jeremiah. If He did so with him then why not the whole Bible?

You mean like when Paul stated "in my opinion, but think have the mind of Christ on this matter?"

 

[SavedByGrace]

You mean like when Paul stated "in my opinion, but think have the mind of Christ on this matter?"

What was Paul's "opinion", is not a personal matter that he just shared, but even this is from the Lord. Read Numbers about Balaam, "Balaam said to Balak, “Behold, I have come to you! Have I now any power of my own to speak anything? The word that God puts in my mouth, that must I speak.” (22:38). And, "And the Lord put a word in Balaam’s mouth and said, “Return to Balak, and thus you shall speak.” (23:5)

 

[Yeshua1]

What was Paul's "opinion", is not a personal matter that he just shared, but even this is from the Lord. Read Numbers about Balaam, "Balaam said to Balak, “Behold, I have come to you! Have I now any power of my own to speak anything? The word that God puts in my mouth, that must I speak.” (22:38). And, "And the Lord put a word in Balaam’s mouth and said, “Return to Balak, and thus you shall speak.” (23:5)

Being moved upon by the Holy Spirit and inspired to record down truth does not mean was all mechanically done!

 

[SavedByGrace]

Being moved upon by the Holy Spirit and inspired to record down truth does not mean was all mechanically done!

see also

"for the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour what you ought to say.” Luke 12:12

"But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he will teach you all things and bring to your remembrance all that I have said to you." John 14:26

"knowing this first of all, that no prophecy of Scripture comes from someone’s own interpretation. For no prophecy was ever produced by the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit." 2 Peter 1:20-21

 

[SavedByGrace]

Being moved upon by the Holy Spirit and inspired to record down truth does not mean was all mechanically done!

Give just one vaild objection to dictational Inspiration

 

[John of Japan]

In the past two weeks, Kevin Bauder has written two blog posts about inspiration. Here are some excerpts.

These excerpts, which may or may not accurately reflect to you where he is going with his explanation, are made to pique your interest. It will be best to read both articles to understand his position. They are here:

• Inspiration
• The Holy Spirit and Production of Scripture

How would you interact with Bauder’s explanation of inspiration? Is he right about “process”? Is his definition of inspiration correct?

I found Bauder's first essay to be right on target theologically and in the area of Greek. It is a good explanation of the Biblical doctrine of verbal-plenary inspiration as taught by many evangelical theologians down through the centuries: Francis Turretin, J. Gresham Machen, Louis Gaussen, Edward J. Young, Rene Pache, John R. Rice, and others.

The second essay is also right on target, and is the historical and evangelical/fundamental position. I like and agree with how he ended it: "In other words, every scripture has two authors: a human and a divine. God is fully and completely the author of every word of scripture, but so is each human author of the text. The true humanity of the authors is on full display as each exhibits unique interests and writes in a unique style. The divine authorship of scripture is also on full display, as every word comes with the full authority of God."

That being said, I would note that the two verbs in 2 Peter 1:20–21 are both aorist, not imperfective, meaning that the verbal aspect is that of an event in general rather than a continuing event. Thus, it is Biblical to say that the inspiration of Scripture was a miraculous process rather than a providential process. Miracles happen in a moment, but providence takes time. Inspiration is a miracle, but preservation is providential.

 

[Yeshua1]

I found Bauder's first essay to be right on target theologically and in the area of Greek. It is a good explanation of the Biblical doctrine of verbal-plenary inspiration as taught by many evangelical theologians down through the centuries: Francis Turretin, J. Gresham Machen, Louis Gaussen, Edward J. Young, Rene Pache, John R. Rice, and others.

The second essay is also right on target, and is the historical and evangelical/fundamental position. I like and agree with how he ended it: "In other words, every scripture has two authors: a human and a divine. God is fully and completely the author of every word of scripture, but so is each human author of the text. The true humanity of the authors is on full display as each exhibits unique interests and writes in a unique style. The divine authorship of scripture is also on full display, as every word comes with the full authority of God."

That being said, I would note that the two verbs in 2 Peter 1:20–21 are both aorist, not imperfective, meaning that the verbal aspect is that of an event in general rather than a continuing event. Thus, it is Biblical to say that the inspiration of Scripture was a miraculous process rather than a providential process. Miracles happen in a moment, but providence takes time. Inspiration is a miracle, but preservation is providential.

The Prophets all spoke and wrote in a different fashion, and in the NT books, Luke greek much more polished then say that used by peter! Which makes sense, as one is a dr, and the other fisherman by trade!

 

[John of Japan]

I'll add here that the term "mechanical dictation" is a term invented by liberals to mock evangelicals and fundamentalists. The term "dictation" has been used by theologians like Gaussen and Rice, but both men would reject the term "mechanical."

This is a very personal doctrine to me, since I was at BJU in the fall of 1971 when John R. Rice was accused by the faculty there of teaching mechanical dictation in his 1969 book, Our God-Breathed Book, the Bible. He actually had two chapters in his book rejecting "mechanical" dictation, but that didn't stop his opponents.

 

[SavedByGrace]

The Prophets all spoke and wrote in a different fashion, and in the NT books, Luke greek much more polished then say that used by peter! Which makes sense, as one is a dr, and the other fisherman by trade!

This does not discount dictated Inspiration