Comments (11)

By Richard Hamilton, October 7, 2008 8:55 pm

Inspiration of Scripture. The very thought of it brings the most impassioned debates to the forefront. This issue has divided churches, gotten professors fired and incited riots (okay, I don’t know of any riots, but it doesn’t seem to be too far fetched). Why is this issue so powerful and divisive? The inspiration of Scripture has historically been at the core of Christian theology and the center of Christian debate. It was debated at Synod of Hippo (393), the Councils at Carthage (397 and 419), and the Council of Trent (1546). It was the first issue addressed in the Westminster Confession of Faith (1664). And it was the reason for the International Council on Biblical Inerrancy and the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy (1978). It was a driving force of the Reformation. In the Restoration Movement, it was at the center of two splits (the Disciples of Christ and the United Churches of Christ).

Today, most of the debate revolves around the understanding of two key passages, 2 Timothy 3:16-17 and 2 Peter 1:20-21.

“All Scripture is inspired by God [God-breathed in the NIV] and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; so that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” 2 Timothy 3:16-17 (NASB)

“…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 (ESV)

From what I’ve seen, most “born-again” types understand these verses to mean that God forcibly possessed the various authors of the Bible. While in one breath, they would say the Holy Spirit superintended the process and used the author’s language and culture, in the next, they would say God hand-picked and was the source of each word and the writers were not the source, nor were they compliant with the process. It seems they admit as little humanity in the texts of the Bible as they feel they can get away with.

When teaching on 1 Peter , famed author/speaker John MacArthur says,

“Now these two verses are just loaded with significance with regard to this matter of inspiration. The key word here is the word “moved” in verse 21. “Moved,” carried along, borne along, it’s a word that is used in secular Greek sources to refer to something floating down stream like a leaf. They were literally carried along by the Holy Spirit. The writers of Scripture, the men who wrote the Scripture…and by the way, there are no female writers of Scripture, all 66 books are written by men…so the Spirit of God moved these men along so that they actually spoke from God borne along by the Holy Spirit.”

It seems to be his understanding that the biblical writers were completely passive through the process, almost as though they were in a trance and didn’t know what they were saying. (I also find his aside on women interesting.) It is quite likely Joe six-pack evangelical view inspiration in these very terms.

Let me give you three hypotheticals and see whether they would make the cut under these standards of inspiration.

One. An early Christian writer sits down and dictates letters to a secretary. He even, on occasion allows the secretary to add a personal comment or two to the letters. Inspired?

Two. Early Christians are worried about their favorite Apostle dying and his stories about Jesus not being passed on. As a solution, they ask a scribe to write down the teachings. After it is finished, he shows them to the Apostle who says the writing is good. Inspired?

Three. An early convert to Christianity, who never physically met Jesus, went around talking to eyewitnesses and compiled what they said into a concise account to Jesus’ life. Inspired?

These don’t fit into the typical understanding of “men moved by the Holy Spirit” or “God-breathed.” But, without their inclusion, the New Testament would be short a few Pauline Epistles, the Gospel of Mark (if you trust Eusebius’ account of its composition…I am skeptical, but many evangelical apologists appeal to him…at least when it is convenient) and the Gospel of Luke.

My favorite is Luke. “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile an account of the things accomplished among us, just as they were handed down to us by those who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,it seemed fitting for me as well, having investigated everything carefully from the beginning, to write it out for you in consecutive order, most excellent Theophilus.” Luke 1:1-2 (NASB) The text itself claims to be a massive research project, an ambitious journalistic undertaking.

So, what does this mean? Well, either Luke-Acts doesn’t belong in the cannon or we misunderstand inspiration.

**the text below was not contained in the original post bu was added Wednesday, October 8.**

Let me be clear. I do believe the bible is inspired, accurate and authoritative! It just seems my understanding of what that means and why that is differs from some.

Comments (0)

By Richard Hamilton, May 2, 2007 2:35 pm

I was preparing a Bible lesson for a high school group recently and wondered about the integrity of the typical approach to Bible study. The passage was Nehemiah 7 and the theme was “A Leader Actively Administrates.” No one is taking a pot shot at a certain publishing company; most sermons, talks, and lessons from Nehemiah focus on leadership. 2 Timothy 3:16,17 is as trademark verse for those who say that every verse has an application in everyday life. So we take a passage of Scripture and dissect it into “application bites.” Often teachers look so closely for nuggets of wisdom in the text that one misses the big picture.

If a person going to teach the Bible with any integrity, it is important to understand what the text meant to the original reader. I cannot tell you for sure how the original reader understood the text of Nehemiah. But it must be asked: do you think they naturally thought, “Leadership is influence (John Maxwell was re-writing that one book back then), and every person has influence over at least one person, so I am a leader and like Nehemiah I should administrate, equip, and motivate those I influence in the same manner?” In my mind this could be what we call in the industry “a stretch.” This approach lacks the common sense we use when reading any other book, fiction or non-fiction.
Imagine you approached a children’s book in the exact same manner. Perhaps I will open the Chronicles of Narnia and read about a talking Beaver rescuing children from talking wolves. Would a couple of pages gives us a clue as to what is going on in the bigger story? Can we draw conclusions from a segment of the story? Of course not. So we should not look closely at each verse if it means we miss how each narrative fits into an overarching story.

When one opens the book of Nehemiah or any other book of the Bible, the focus should be massaging the bigger questions out of those we teach. Why was the wall broken down? Why was Nehemiah in Persia? Why did God allow his people to go into exile? Does God always deal with sin in this manner? How does he give man freewill and still control the destiny of nations? How does God redeem His people?

There are overarching themes woven throughout Scripture-how mankind is designed to interact with their Creator, the power of sin, how God punishes, redeems and calls out of chosen people; teachers should consider showing how each story is a piece in a larger puzzle.

Perhaps the only books in the Bible where we dare even attempt pull specific commands straight out of the text into everyday life is the epistles, but even then we need to be aware of cultural considerations.