The Inspiration of the Bible

The Inspiration of the Bible THE INSPIRATION OF THE BIBLE
B. C. Goodpasture Is the Bible a product of human reason? Is it merely a book of literature, or is it an inspired volume? If inspired, in what sense? Is it inspired only in the sense that it bears the marks of literary genius as do the waitings of Shakespeare, Milton, and Browning? Or is it inspired in the sense that it was written by men under the influence of the Roly Spirit? The question of inspiration is vital. If the Bible is not of divine origin, we cannot rely upon its statement of fact; we need not bow to its claims of authority; and we cannot derive hope and comfort from its promises. If it represents only the efforts of uninspired men, we may view its contents with little or no concern. On the other hand, if the Bible came from God, its authority is unquestionable and its statements are infallible. The Bible Claims Inspiration
The nature and content of the Bible are such that the rank and file of its readers in all generations have recognized God as its author. Man would not have written such a book, if he could; and could not, if he would. It moves on a superhuman plane in design, in nature, and in teaching. It caters not to worldly desire and ambition. It condemns much which men in the flesh highly prize, and commends much which they despise. Its thoughts are not the thoughts of men.

Moreover, the Bible claims to be inspired. Even the casual reader has been impressed with the frequent use of such expressions as; “Thus saith the Lord,’’ “God spake,” “The Lord testified, saying,” and “The Lord hath spoken it.” It is said that in the prophets alone these expressions occur 1,300 times; and in the Old Testament, 2,500 such phrases, attributing the authorship to God, are found. The writers of the Bible never pretended that they wrote with no illumination other than the dimly-burning light of human reason. They claimed to speak as they were moved—borne along—by the Holy spirit. They spoke of the Bible and its various parts as having been given through the guidance of the Almighty. Paul said: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be perfect throughly furnished unto all good works” (2 Timothy 3:16-17). Paul said “all Scripture.” It is evident that he did not have in mind any “theory of partial inspiration.” What he said is quite different from the modernistic statement: “The Bible contains the word of God.” According to Paul, the Bible IS the word of God; it is all given by inspiration. Peter declared “that no prophecy of the Scripture is of any private interpretation. For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost” (2 Peter 1:20-21). When Moses was about to begin his work as deliverer and lawgiver, God said to him: “Now therefore go, and I will be with thy mouth, and teach thee what thou shalt say” (Exodus 4:12). At the end of his life, David bore fhis testimony: “The Spirit of the Lord spake by me, and his word was in my tongue” (2 Samuel 23:2). And the Lord said to Jeremiah: “I have put my words in thy mouth” (Jeremiah 1:9). Jesus endorsed the Old Testament in its entirety. He said that “all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me” (Luke 24:44,). These three divisions—“Law of Moses,” “Prophets,” and “Psalms”— according to Jewish usage, included all the Old Testament. Further, Jesus specifically endorsed those portions of the Old Testament which have most often been under attack by the enemies of the Bible. He put the stamp of his approval upon the story of creation (Matthew 19:8), the account of the flood (Matthew 24:37), and the story of Jonah and the whale (Matthew 12:40). He put Satan to flight during the temptation in the wilderness by using quotations from Deuteronomy, a book which has been often under the lire of modernists. It is not surprising, therefore, that the devil does not think well of Deuteronomy. Almost from the time of his defeat in the wilderness he has been denying the canonicity of this book. In modern times he has moved his most trusted henchmen, the modernists, to wage a relentless war on the fifth book of the Pentateuch. Jesus also endorsed the New Testament before it was written. He promised the apostles that the Holy Spirit would enable them to know “how” and “what” to say (Matthew 10:19), and that he would guide them into all truth (John 16:13). On Pentecost the Spirit came on the apostles, and they began to speak as he gave them utterance (Acts 2:4). Paul commended the Thessalonians for having received his word—not as the word of men, but, as indeed it is, the word of God (1 Thessalonians 2:13). He spoke not in “words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth” (1 Corinthians 2:13). And John, speaking of his writings, frequently urged his readers to “hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches” (Revelation 2:11). The Apostles claimed the very guidance of the Spirit which Jesus promises. Other Scriptures could be cited in support of the claim of inspiration for all parts of the Bible, but these are sufficient. The Nature of Inspiration
In view of the various modern uses of the word, it is hardly enough to say that the Bible is inspired. Almost any modernist will admit that it is inspired, if you will let him define what he means. In like manner he will grant that Christ is divine, but he means only in the sense that we all are divine. He will not admit the deity of Jesus. As a rule, in granting that the Bible is inspired, he means it only in the same sense that Shakespeare, Milton, and Browning were inspired. He strips the Bible of its inspiration just as he strips Christ of his deity. All modernistic views of inspiration are wholly inadequate.

What is meant by inspiration as applied to the Bible?
Paul said: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God" (2 Timothy 3:16). What does he claim for the Scriptures in this statement? One word “inspiration” literally means a breathing in. It is derived from two Latin words, in and spiro, which mean to blow or breathe into. In the original the Greek word theopneustos is employed. It is composed of two words—Theos, God; and pneustos, breathed, from pneo, to blow or breathe. Pneuma, meaning spirit, comes from the verb pneo. “Pneustos, then, might mean spirited, and then theopneustos would mean God-spirited, or God- breathed, or ‘filled with the breath of God,’ or the product of the divine breath (or Spirit), or given by God through the Spirit. The word implies an influence from without, producing effects which are beyond natural powers.” (Miller.) “The book that is in this sense inspired is one into which something of another spirit or mind has been breathed; in order words, its author has been overshadowed by a power outside himself.” Inspiration means that influence which God exercises through the Holy Spirit over the minds of Biblical writers to make them infallible in the receiving and recording of his will. There is a difference, however, between revelation and inspiration.

Revelation has reference to the imparting of knowledge. It renders its recipient wiser. It is the means through which God imparts facts and truths not previously known. Persons uninspired sometimes received revelations in Bible times. The children of Israel, assembled under the burning crags of Sinai, heard God speak in awful majesty (Exodus 20:18-21; Ileb. 12:19) ; but no one would claim that they were all inspired. When the martyr, Stephen, was being stoned, he said, “Behold, I' see the heavens opened, and the Son of man standing on the right hand of God.” (Acts 7:56.) This was a revelation, but who would claim that the unbelieving Jews who heard it and stoned Stephen were inspired? On the other hand, inspiration has reference primarily to the accurate recording and communicating of knowledge. It preserves its recipient from error in teaching. It is possible that some of the writers of the Bible received no revelations. This is possibly true of some of the writers of the historical books of the Old Testament. The writers were certainly inspired in the selection and recording of facts within the realm of human experience, but this would not require revelation. The account of the wilderness wanderings was not a matter of revelation, but rather of fact known by personal observation. He says he derived his material from those “which from the beginning were eye-witnesses, and ministers of the word.” He “traced the course of all things accurately from the first.” (Luke 1:2-3.) He did this by inspiration, but in doing so he was not primarily the recipient of any revelation. Thus it is possible for one to receive revelation without inspiration, and to receive inspiration without revelation. Not all the Bible is revelation, but it is all inspired. It contains revelation; it is wholly inspired. The words, as well as the thoughts, of the sacred penmen are inspired. Jesus promised this very type of inspiration. He said that the Holy Spirit would teach the apostles “how” and “what” to speak. The “what” means the thought; the “how” means the verbiage, the manner of expression. This is verbal inspiration. It would be interesting for a modernist to tell us how God could inspire the thoughts without at the same time inspiring the words. How can we carry on a conversation without words? How can we express thoughts without words or their equivalent? Jesus said: “Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished.” (Matthew 5:18.) Thus he asserts the verbal inspiration and guarantees the verbal indestructibility of the text. Not even a “jot,” small letter, or “tittle,” part of a letter, shall pass until the law shall have been fulfilled. Paul said that he spoke “not in words which man’s wisdom teacheth,” but in words “which the Spirit teacheth.” (1 Corinthians 2:13.) This is a positive claim of verbal inspiration. To deny it is to impeach Paul. Again, Paul makes an argument to turn on the number of a noun in Galatians 3:16 “Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.” If the very words in this case are not inspired, Paul's argument is weak and untenable.

While the Holy Spirit moved the penmen of the Bible to write, yet they were free to speak through their own individual background, personality, vocabulary, and style. “Inspiration did not involve the suspension or suppression of the human faculties, so neither did it interfere with the free exercise of the distinctive mental characteristics of the individual. If a Hebrew was inspired, he spoke as a Hebrew; if a Greek, he spoke as a Greek; if an educated man, he spoke as a man of culture; if uneducated, he spoke as such a man is wont to speak. If his mind was logical, he reasoned, as did Paul; if emotional and contemplative, he wrote as John wrote.” Their inspiration was not purely mechanical. There may be a few cases of mechanical, or near mechanical, inspiration in the Bible; but it is the exception, not the rule. When Balaam’s ass spoke, that was mechanical; and when men spoke in unknown tongues, as on Pentecost, that was mechanical, or seemingly so. If the writers had been mere pens, instead of penmen, in the hands of God the style and vocabulary of the Bible would be uniform. But such is not the case. Take, for example, the writings of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. Their plan, style, and peculiar expressions are strikingly different. Matthew was a Jew. He writes with a Jewish background. He gives detailed reports of what Jesus said, quotes often from the Old Testament, and speaks of the “kingdom of heaven,” whereas the other writers say “kingdom of God.” Mark features the mighty works of Jesus. He uses the word “straightway,” or immediately, many times. Luke was a Gentile and a physician. He uses the expression “a certain” frequently. His medical background is evident in his writing. When Jesus said that it was easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God, Matthew and Mark use the Greek word raphis, which means an ordinary needle; but Luke uses the word belone, which means a surgeon’s needle. (Matthew 19:24; Mark 10:25; Luke 18:25.) In describing a man who had dropsy (Luke 14:2), Luke said he was a “dropsical man,” hudropikos. This is a medical term common in the writings of the Greek physicians. It is not found elsewhere in the New Testament. John records much that is not mentioned by the other writers. He uses the solemn “verily verily” twenty-five times. He is the only writer who uses this expression. Many other examples could be cited which show the differences of style and expression found among inspired writers. Dr. William Evans well says: “We must conclude, therefore, that while from the divine side the Holy Spirit gave through men clearly and faithfully that which he wished to communicate, from the human side that communication came forth in language such as men themselves would naturally have chosen. We may, therefore, safely say that we believe in plenary and verbal inspiration—that is to say, the words as well as the thought have been given, whether mediately or im-mediately under the influence of the divine spirit.” It should be remembered that there are certain limitations on inspiration as related to the writers of the Bible. In the first place, 'it did not impart omniscience.

Paul was inspired, but he did not know how many persons he baptized in Corinth. (1 Corinthians 1:16.) He spoke as he was moved by the Holy Spirit, but he had to send to Thessalonica to learn the faith of the brethren there. (1 Thessalonians 3:5.) Inspiration was limited to the purpose for which it was given, viz., “the communication of divine truth on certain topics by divine authority.” Inspiration did not render Paul immune to bodily affliction or make him a better tentmaker. Inspired men were infallible only as teachers and writers and when acting as the spokesmen of God. Their inspiration made them neither astronomers nor farmers. It was limited to the immediate purpose for which it was given. It did not make them incapable of sinning in their manner of living. The Man of God from Judah made a startling prediction concerning Josiah and his work, yet he died for his sin before he returned home. (1 Kings 13.) David sinned grievously. (2 Samuel 12.) Peter denied his Lord, and Paul gave diligence lest after he had preached to others he might be a castaway. (1 Corinthians 9:17). Inspiration does not vouch for the truthfulness of all statements which it quotes. Certain statements made by Satan are quoted by the inspired writers—for example, “Ye shall not surely die.” (Genesis 3:4.) It is true that the devil said this, but what he said is not true. Inspiration never lies, but it sometimes records the statements of those who did lie. In 1 Samuel 31:3-4 the Bible states that Saul killed himself. In 2 Samuel 1:1-10 the Bible states that a young man, claiming to be an Amalekite, reported to David, probably with a hope of reward, that he had slain Saul. This was false. The Bible does not state that the Amalekite slew Saul, but it does record the fact that he told David that he slew Saul. His statement was, according to 1 Samuel 31:3-4, false, but the record of the statement is inspired and true.” (Miller.) The Evidences of Inspiration
The evidences of the inspiration of the Bible fall into two classes—namely, external and internal. Josephus and Philo, learned Jewish authors, testify that the Jews always regarded the Old Testament as a product of holy men writing under the supervision of the Holy Spirit. From the very nature of the case however, the chief arguments in favor of the divine origin of the Bible are largely internal. This fact does not militate against the arguments in favor of inspiration. If the contents of a given bottle were in question, the best way to find out the truth would be to make a careful analysis of what was in the bottle. The internal evidence would be more conclusive than any kind of external evidence that could be produced. If the nature of a nugget of metal, which many thought to be gold, was in question, the best way to arrive at the fact would be to examine the nugget itself. In like manner we have a book, the Bible, which we claim is inspired. Does it bear the marks of inspiration? Will it stand the acid test of internal investigation? We have a right to examine this book to see whether or not it bears the marks of divine origin. It has nothing to fear from the most rigid investigation.

1. As an evidence of its divine origin, we mention the fact that the Bible has anticipated and answered every major departure from the faith which has been made during the past nineteen hundred years. Only an example or two can be cited. The Roman Catholic Church has denied the cup to the “laity,” the rank and file of its members. Jesus, as if in specific anticipation of this error, said at the institution of the Lord’s Supper: “Drink ye all of it.” (Matthew 26:27.) He did not mean, as some modern cranks have foolishly contended, that they must drink the entire contents of the cup, the fruit of the vine; but that each one must drink of it. The disciples so understood him. It is said that “They all drank of it.” (Mark 14:23.) Again, Paul said: “The Spirit saith expressly, that in later times some shall fall away from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons, . . . forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats, which God created to be received.” (1 Timothy 4:1-3.) It is a matter of common knowledge that the Romish Church has forbidden marriage to its leaders and commanded its members to abstain from meats at certain seasons. In doing this it 'has followed the “doctrines of demons.” Some so-called “Protestant” churches ape the “Mother of Harlots” in abstaining from meats. All such practices have been anticipated and condemned. By no human wisdom or ingenuity could these errors have been foreseen and answered. The only adequate explanation is inspiration.

2. The Bible is abreast with the most up-to-date scientific knowledge. Yet the Bible was not written as a treatise on science. It was written in the language of the people addressed at the time it was produced, yet it contains no statement of fact which is at war with scientific truth. The order of events in creation as enumerated by Moses, is in agreement with the latest scientific pronounce-ments. Jeremiah said that “the host of heaven cannot be numbered.” (Jeremiah 33:22.) The ancients thought, however, that the stars could be numbered. They thought that they had counted them. Now no astronomer ever hopes to Enow the number of the host of heaven. How did Jeremiah know this? Job said many centuries ago: “He stretcheth out the north over the empty space and hangeth the earth upon nothing.” (Job 26:7.) How did the Uzzean sage know that there is a vast stretch in the northern heavens which is without stars? How did he know about the law of gravitation and the forces by which the earth is held in its proper place? He spoke far in advance of scientific discovery. He had no modern telescopic equipment, and he was not a world traveler. Whence came this accurate knowledge concerning the heavens and the earth? Isaiah used language which contemplated the rotundity of the earth. He said: “It is he that sitteth above the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers.” (Isaiah 40:22.) Isaiah had never, like Magellan, sailed around the earth. He had access to no modern maps or geographies. How did he come into possession of such knowledge? Jesus used language which took into consideration the fact that people live on a round earth, a sphere. He said that when he comes the second time two men would be in the field; one would be taken and one left. Two women would be grinding at the mill; one would be taken and one left. (Matthew 24:40). Apd in that night two men would be in one bed; one would be taken and one would be left. (Luke 17:34). Normally, at the time Jesus spoke, persons were in the field by day, in bed by night, and ground at the mill by twilight. Jesus meant, then, that when he comes it would be daylight at some places, twilight at others, and at still other places it would be night. This could happen only on a round earth. How did Jesus know this? He lived and died in Palestine—he was seldon outside that country. He lived in sight of the Mediterranean Sea, yet never mentioned It. There is no evidence that he was ever on its waters, yet he speaks of conditions which will prevail when he comes again in such manner as to show that he knew that the world is round. How did he know it? How did he and the others quoted in this connection know about matters of science so far in advance of their times? The only answer is that they knew by inspiration of the Almighty.

3. Another evidence of the divine authorship of the Bible is its utter impartiality in the delineation of human character. When uninspired men are writing about those whom they eulogize and adore, they are prone to leave unmentioned things which are uncomplimentary and sinful. But not so with the writers of the Bible. Moses, the great lawgiver, deliverer, and prophet, is one of the most colossal figures in all history. He is the most highly honored character of the Old Testament. His name alone of the Old Testament worthies is associated with that of the Lamb in the song of the blest. (Revelation 15:3.) Yet the Bible relates the sad story of Moses’ sin at the rock and his consequent inability to enter the land of promise. David sinned, -and the Bible records his sins. Peter sinned, and the tragic story of his thrice-repeated denial of his Lord is faithfully given. If men, apart from the moving of the Holy Spirit, had been writing about these men, they would either have left their sins unmentioned or would have “written them down.” We cannot account for such fairness and frankness in the portrayal of heroic characters except upon the ground of divine authorship.

4. As an additional proof of its inspiration, we suggest the fact that the Bible does not cater to human curiosity. It never stoops to satisfy the curious meddlesomeness of man. This is not true of books written by uninspired men. The Bible often leaves unrecorded that which men would like to know. It is said that upon one occasion Jesus wrote twice upon the ground. (John 8:1-8.) This is the only instance of his writing. What he wrote would be news of the first quality, yet we do not know what he inscribed on the sacred soil of Palestine. It is significant that the Bible does not contain one book—not even one sentence—from the pen of Jesus. His childhood' and youth are passed in almost complete silence. From the age of twelve to his baptism at the age of thirty we have no word from his lips. How different if men had been writing about him apart from the influence of the Holy Spirit. The Bible mentions several persons who were raised from the dead. Yet none of these brought back any word concerning what they saw and experienced beyond the veil. Their tongues were tied and their lips were locked concerning the great beyond. How different it would have been had men been writing according to the dictates of their own nature and learning. They could not, or would not, have foregone the pleasure of speaking some word to gratify the longing and anxious curiosity of men. Impostors have ever sought to solve the mysterious and tell of the world to come. Even the silence of the Bible is intructive. It, as well as its speech, is an argument in favor of its divine origin.

5. Again, the unity of the Bible is a mark of its super-human origin. It is composed of sixty-six books, written by about forty different persons, under a variety of conditions and in widely separated countries, during a period of sixteen centuries. Yet it is one book not only in form, but also in purpose, subject matter, and development. ‘‘The testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.” It was written to make men wise unto salvation. Each writer has made a distinct and fitting contribution to the whole. This can be accounted for only on the ground that a superior Intelligence directed these men to write what they did. “If,” as Everest remarks, “forty sculptors, living in different countries, scattered through sixteen centuries, and belonging to several schools of art, should fashion, without knowledge of each other or concert of action, as many different parts of a marble statue, and if at the end of these centuries it should be found that these portions exactly fitted one another and resulted in a work of art the most perfect and the most sublime, then all would recognize the miracle, and that there was a presiding Intel-ligence more enduring and more exalted than man. Such are the circumstances under which wrought the forty- sacred writers, and such was the resdlt of their Labors’' —the Bible. Its inspiration alone accounts for its unity.

6. Finally, we cite its prophecies as a conclusive evidence of the divine authorship of the Bible. Impostors have generally steered clear of prophecy. They have been afraid to jeopardize their reputations by making predictions. When they have yielded to the temptation to prophesy, they have invariably been embarrassed by what followed. On the other hand, the writers of the Bible have made frequent predictions, not one of which has failed of fulfillment, in due season. There are three kinds of prophecies in the Bible—namely, those which have been fulfilled, those which are in the process of being fulfilled, and those yet to be fulfilled. Obviously the first two classes are all that can now be used as evidence of inspiration. From these two classes we select a few examples. In Joshua 6:26 we read that after Jericho had been de-stroyed, it was predicted that the man who rebuilt the city would lay the foundation with the death of his firstborn son and set up the gates with the death of his youngest son. Time moved on. Five hundred fifty years passed. This was too long a time for the man who did the predicting to have anything to do with the fulfilling. Hiel presumed to rebuild Jericho. When he laid the foundation, his first-born son, Abiram, died; and when he set up the gates, his youngest son, Segub, died—exactly as it had been predicted centuries before. (1 Kings 16:34.) The length of time and the number of details involved render it impossible to explain this prophecy apart from inspiration. Again, we read that a man of God came from Judah to Jeroboam as he stood by the altar to burn incense, and predicted that a descendant of David, Josiah by name, would burn on that altar priests and the bones of men in his efforts to destroy idolatry and restore the worship of the true God. (Kings 13.) This was a highly detailed and circumstantial prophecy, yet three hundred fifty years later it was fulfilled to the letter. (2 Kings 23:15-20.) The author of this prediction could have had nothing to do with its fulfillment. He died soon after the prediction was made. Besides, the fulfillment came centuries later. How did the man of God know so far in advance that a certain man, Josiah by name, of the royal family, would do these specific things on Jeroboam’s altar? Again, we answer, inspiration is the only adequate explanation. When Frederick the Great, of Prussia, asked his court chaplain to give him in one word the evidence for the inspiration of the Bible, he answered: “The Jews.” This was not a bad answer. The Jews do furnish strong evidence of the supernatural origin of the Bible. In Deuteronomy 28 Moses gave a very detailed prediction concerning the future of the Jews. He told them that as long as they were faithful to the Lord they would be prosperous in the land, and that no enemy could stand before them. But if they proved to be unfaithful, he warned, they would be removed from the land and severely punished. The punishment and the captivities which they would bring upon themselves were vividly described. Moses even went so far as to describe the siege and destruction of Jerusalem and the subsequent misfortunes of the Jews. He predicted that the Lord would bring against the Jews a nation from afar, as swift as the eagle flieth, whose speech the Jews would not understand; that this nation would besiege Judea and Jerusalem in all their gates until the walls were destroyed; that in the siege the inhabitants would suffer unparalleled misfortune; that the delicate women of Jerusalem would devour their own children by reason of the famine; that great numbers of the Jews would be killed in the siege; that multitudes, till no man would buy them, would be carried to Egypt and sold into slavery; that they would be removed from Palestine and scattered among all the peoples of the earth; that they would be oppressed and despoiled; that they would find no rest day or night, but be anxious and troubled everywhere; that they would be a byword and proverb among the nations. Josephus’ description of the siege and overthrow of Jerusalem is the best commentary on that part of the prediction which has to do with the destruction of the holy city. The later history of the Jews is in exact fulfillment of every feature of the Mosaic prophecy. Jeremiah said: “I will make a full end of all the nations whither I have scattered thee, but I will not make a full end of thee.” (Jeremiah 30:11.) The ancient Assyrians are gone, the Babylonians are gone, the Old Roman Empire has perished; yet the Jews are still here. They are a living monument to the genuineness and inspiration of the Old Testament prophecies. How could Moses have foretold the destruction of Jerusalem fifteen hundred years before it came to pass or related the misfortunes of the Jews down through thirty- five centuries to our day except by divine inspiration? How did Jeremiah know that the Jews would survive, even in the fires of* persecution, all their ancient foes? We can account for the Bible only on the grounds that its writers spoke as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. The Bible has been in the fiery furnace of human in-vestigation for these many centuries, yet it emerges without the smell of fire upon its garments. It has stood the acid test of practical experience. It has never failed when fairly tried. We have seen it in the forum of public discussion, we have seen it at the bedside of the dying, we have seen it at the graves of the dead; yet we have never seen it weighed and found wanting. It is God’s Book.

“A glory guilds the sacred page,
Majestic like the sun;
It lends its light to every age;
It lends to all, but borrows none.”